Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Disallow credentials with VC/JSON and VC/JWT members that do not encode the same value #64

Open
mirceanis opened this issue Mar 1, 2021 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
pinned an issue that may take a while to fix and should not be closed automatically. spec more parties need to agree

Comments

@mirceanis
Copy link
Member

As discussed in PR#63 there is potential ambiguity during VC/JWT <-> VC/JSON transformation if both entries are present but encode different values.

During VC or VP creation these methods should throw an error in that case and the transformations that are performed for convenience could override the entries that don't correspond to the respective encoding.

It is very inefficient to keep both representations in a credential payload, but that is an ambiguity with the spec we're working on so it must be handled.
Let's discuss the best approach before venturing a fix.

@mirceanis mirceanis added spec more parties need to agree incomplete This is not well defined. Ask for clarification before starting work labels Mar 1, 2021
@rado0x54 rado0x54 self-assigned this May 7, 2021
@awoie awoie removed the incomplete This is not well defined. Ask for clarification before starting work label Jun 21, 2021
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Aug 30, 2021

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Aug 30, 2021
@mirceanis mirceanis added the pinned an issue that may take a while to fix and should not be closed automatically. label Aug 30, 2021
@stale stale bot removed the stale label Aug 30, 2021
@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jan 13, 2022

We've discussed this issue in the VC WG, and there are currently 2 camps.

I am in the camp of preserving all information, others are in the camp of using "instead of" and potentially loosing some information.

The next VC WG will likely address this with a single spec dedicated to JWT, and I expect one of the camps will loose at that point.

I would advise implementers to not destroy information, the redundancy and interoperability is worth more than the bytes saved.

See also this list: https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Av2.0

@mirceanis
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you for the summary.
Indeed it's not ok to drop information. Fixing this particular GH issue means throwing an error when information would be overridden or dropped, thus not allowing any ambiguity.

@OR13
Copy link
Contributor

OR13 commented Jan 13, 2022

@mirceanis yes, we have a similar issue we are tracking in our implementation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pinned an issue that may take a while to fix and should not be closed automatically. spec more parties need to agree
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants