Identity Management Systems: Singular Identities and Multiple Moral Issues

Abstract

The paper examines some of the competing normative claims surrounding the development of Identity Management (IM) systems in general and Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) systems in particular. It is argued that SSI developments should be assessed against the backdrop of IMs attempting to implement a global identity layer based on aggregated singular identities and reputation scores. It is also argued that this trend defines key ethical issues pertaining to the development of SSI systems. In order to explicate and evaluate these issues, the paper looks at the desirability of singular aggregated identities through the lens of moral-philosophical theories. It is argued that such an analysis strongly suggests moral desirability of a plural identities approach in SSIs that have built-in advantage for the implementation of the practical separation of identities.

Promises and Problems in the Adoption of Self-Sovereign Identity Management from a Consumer Perspective

“…The protection of personal data is made even more difficult by the industry's greed for data, which SSI might even aggravate: Although SSI enables the minimization of disclosed private data [2], this does not yet mean that the industry will also submit to this option. Still, they can ask for whatever data they please as a condition of entry -very much like what is common practice now [13]. The interests might rise further as it can be assumed that information extracted from externally verified credentials could be more valuable than, potentially false, data entered directly by consumers.…”

“…Depending on the implemented process on how consumers decide whom to trust, central trust anchors are prone to be forged [13]. While responsible and confident consumers should be able to identify fake identities when they are supported by public clues (similar to the verified badge on social networks), vulnerable consumer will be at risk to fall for scams with forged identities Table 1: Trust Management.…”

Sovereignty, privacy, and ethics in blockchain-based identity management systems

“…Representation of this aspect of persons is exactly what is missing when personal data is piled up in databases and personal identity become nominalised in administrative procedures (Manders-Huits 2010 ). This moral failure takes a different dimension when one’s identity is not just nominalised, but also evaluated in the normative framework externally and authoritarianly imposed on the bearer of an identity (Ishmaev and Stokkink 2020 ).…”