diff options
Diffstat (limited to '_posts/2018-10-25-rethinking-identity.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | _posts/2018-10-25-rethinking-identity.md | 292 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 292 deletions
diff --git a/_posts/2018-10-25-rethinking-identity.md b/_posts/2018-10-25-rethinking-identity.md deleted file mode 100644 index d3520d7..0000000 --- a/_posts/2018-10-25-rethinking-identity.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,292 +0,0 @@ ---- -title: Rethinking Identity -description: >- - A more useful way of thinking about identity on the internet, and using that - to build a service which makes our online life better. ---- - -In my view, the major social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, -etc...) are broken. They worked well at small scales, but billions of people are -now exposed to them, and [Murphy's Law][murphy] has come into effect. The weak -points in the platforms have been found and exploited, to the point where -they're barely usable for interacting with anyone you don't already know in -person. - -[murphy]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law - -On the other hand, social media, at its core, is a powerful tool that humans -have developed, and it's not one to be thrown away lightly (if it can be thrown -away at all). It's worthwhile to try and fix it. So that's what this post is -about. - -A lot of moaning and groaning has already been done on how social media is toxic -for the average person. But the average person isn't doing anything more than -receiving and reacting to their environment. If that environment is toxic, the -person in it becomes so as well. It's certainly possible to filter the toxicity -out, and use a platform to your own benefit, but that takes work on the user's -part. It would be nice to think that people will do more than follow the path of -least resistance, but at scale that's simply not how reality is, and people -shouldn't be expected to do that work. - -To identify what has become toxic about the platforms, first we need to identify -what a non-toxic platform would look like. - -The ideal definition for social media is to give people a place to socialize -with friends, family, and the rest of the world. Defining "socialize" is tricky, -and probably an exercise only a socially awkward person who doesn't do enough -socializing would undertake. "Expressing one's feelings, knowledge, and -experiences to other people, and receiving theirs in turn" feels like a good -approximation. A platform where true socializing was the only activity would be -ideal. - -Here are some trends on our social media which have nothing to do with -socializing: artificially boosted follower numbers on Instagram to obtain -product sponsors, shills in Reddit comments boosting a product or company, -russian trolls on Twitter spreading propaganda, trolls everywhere being dicks -and switching IPs when they get banned, and [that basketball president whose -wife used burner Twitter accounts to trash talk players][president]. - -[president]: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/sports/bryan-colangelo-sixers-wife.html - -These are all examples of how anonymity can be abused on social media. I want -to say up front that I'm _not_ against anonymity on the internet, and that I -think we can have our cake and eat it too. But we _should_ acknowledge the -direct and indirect problems anonymity causes. We can't trust that anyone on -social media is being honest about who they are and what their motivation is. -This problem extends outside of social media too, to Amazon product reviews (and -basically any other review system), online polls and raffles, multiplayer games, -and surely many other other cases. - -## Identity - -To fix social media, and other large swaths of the internet, we need to rethink -identity. This process started for me a long time ago, when I watched [this TED -talk][identity], which discusses ways in which we misunderstand identity. -Crucially, David Birch points out that identity is not a name, it's more -fundamental than that. - -[identity]: https://www.ted.com/talks/david_birch_identity_without_a_name - -In the context of online platforms, where a user creates an account which -identifies them in some way, identity breaks down into 3 distinct problems -which are often conflated: - -* Authentication: Is this identity owned by this person? -* Differentiation: Is this identity unique to this person? -* Authorization: Is this identity allowed to do X? - -For internet platform developers, authentication has been given the full focus. -Blog posts, articles, guides, and services abound which deal with properly -hashing and checking passwords, two factor authentication, proper account -recovery procedure, etc... While authentication is not a 100% solved problem, -it's had the most work done on it, and the problems which this post deals with -are not affected by it. - -The problem which should instead be focused on is differentiation. - -## Differentiation - -I want to make very clear, once more, that I am _not_ in favor of de-anonymizing -the web, and doing so is not what I'm proposing. - -Differentiation is without a doubt the most difficult identity problem to solve. -It's not even clear that it's solvable offline. Take this situation: you are in -a room, and you are told that one person is going to walk in, then leave, then -another person will do the same. These two persons may or may not be the same -person. You're allowed to do anything you like to each person (with their -consent) in order to determine if they are the same person or not. - -For the vast, vast majority of cases you can simply look with your eyeballs and -see if they are different people. But this will not work 100% of the time. -Identical twins are an obvious example of two persons looking like one, but a -malicious actor with a disguise might be one person posing as two. Biometrics -like fingerprints, iris scanning, and DNA testing fail for many reasons (the -identical twin case being one). You could attempt to give the first a unique -marking on their skin, but who's to say they don't have a solvent, which can -clean that marking off, waiting right outside the door? - -The solutions and refutations can continue on pedantically for some time, but -the point is that there is likely not a 100% solution, and even the 90% -solutions require significant investment. Differentiation is a hard problem, -which most developers don't want to solve. Most are fine with surrogates like -checking that an email or phone number is unique to the platform, but these -aren't enough to stop a dedicated individual or organization. - -### Roll Your Own Differentiation - -If a platform wants to roll their own solution to the differentiation problem, a -proper solution, it might look something like this: - -* Submit an image of your passport, or other government issued ID. This would - have to be checked against the appropriate government agency to ensure the - ID is legitimate. - -* Submit an image of your face, alongside a written note containing a code given - by the platform. Software to detect manipulated images would need to be - employed, as well as reverse image searching to ensure the image isn't being - reused. - -* Once completed, all data needs to be hashed/fingerprinted and then destroyed, - so sensitive data isn't sitting around on servers, but can still be checked - against future users signing up for the platform. - -* A dedicated support team would be needed to handle edge-cases and mistakes. - -None of these is trivial, nor would I trust an up-and-coming platform which is -being bootstrapped out of a basement to implement any of them correctly. -Additionally, going through with this process would be a _giant_ point of -friction for a user creating a new account; they likely would go use a different -platform instead, which didn't have all this nonsense required. - -### Differentiation as a Service - -This is the crux of this post. - -Instead of each platform rolling their own differentiation, what if there was a -service for it. Users would still have to go through the hassle described above, -but only once forever, and on a more trustable site. Then platforms, no matter -what stage of development they're at, could use that service to ensure that -their community of users is free from the problems of fake accounts and trolls. - -This is what the service would look like: - -* A user would have to, at some point, have gone through the steps above to - create an account on the differentiation-as-a-service (DaaS) platform. This - account would have the normal authentication mechanisms that most platforms - do (password, two-factor, etc...). - -* When creating an account on a new platform, the user would login to their DaaS - account (similar to the common "login with Google/Facebook/Twitter" buttons). - -* The DaaS then returns an opaque token, an effectively random string which - uniquely identifies that user, to the platform. The platform can then check in - its own user database for any other users using that token, and know if the - user already has an account. All of this happens without any identifying - information being passed to the platform. - -Similar to how many sites outsource to Cloudflare to handle DDoS protection, -which is better handled en masse by people familiar with the problem, the DaaS -allows for outsourcing the problem of differentiation. Users are more likely to -trust an established DaaS service than a random website they're signing up for. -And signing up for a DaaS is a one-time event, so if enough platforms are using -the DaaS it could become worthwhile for them to do so. - -Finally, since the DaaS also handles authentication, a platform could outsource -that aspect of identity management to it as well. This is optional for the -platform, but for smaller platforms which are just starting up it might be -worthwhile to save that development time. - -### Traits of a Successful DaaS - -It's possible for me to imagine a world where use of DaaS' is common, but -bridging the gap between that world and this one is not as obvious. Still, I -think it's necessary if the internet is to ever evolve passed being, primarily, -a home for trolls. There are a number of traits of an up-and-coming DaaS which -would aid it in being accepted by the internet: - -* **Patience**: there is a critical mass of users and platforms using DaaS' - where it becomes more advantageous for platforms to use the DaaS than not. - Until then, the DaaS and platforms using it need to take deliberate but small - steps. For example: making DaaS usage optional for platform users, and giving - their accounts special marks to indicate they're "authentic" (like Twitter's - blue checkmark); giving those users' activity higher weight in algorithms; - allowing others to filter out activity of non-"authentic" users; etc... These - are all preliminary steps which can be taken which encourage but don't require - platform users to use a DaaS. - -* **User-friendly**: most likely the platforms using a DaaS are what are going - to be paying the bills. A successful DaaS will need to remember that, no - matter where the money comes from, if the users aren't happy they'll stop - using the DaaS, and platforms will be forced to switch to a different one or - stop using them altogether. User-friendliness means more than a nice - interface; it means actually caring for the users' interests, taking their - privacy and security seriously, and in all other aspects being on their side. - In that same vein, competition is important, and so... - -* **No country/government affiliation**: If the DaaS was to be run by a - government agency it would have no incentive to provide a good user - experience, since the users aren't paying the bills (they might not even be in - that country). A DaaS shouldn't be exclusive to any one government or country - anyway. Perhaps it starts out that way, to get off the ground, but ultimately - the internet is a global institution, and is healthiest when it's connecting - individuals _around the world_. A successful DaaS will reach beyond borders - and try to connect everyone. - -Obviously actually starting a DaaS would be a huge undertaking, and would -require proper management and good developers and all that, but such things -apply to most services. - -## Authorization - -The final aspect of identity management, which I haven't talked about yet, is -authorization. This aspect deals with what a particular identity is allowed to -do. For example, is an identity allowed to claim they have a particular name, or -are from a particular place, or are of a particular age? Other things like -administration and moderation privileges also fall under authorization, but they -are generally defined and managed within a platform. - -A DaaS has the potential to help with authorization as well, though with a giant -caveat. If a DaaS were to not fingerprint and destroy the user's data, like -their name and birthday and whatnot, but instead store them, then the following -use-case could also be implemented: - -* A platform wants to know if a user is above a certain age, let's say. It asks - the DaaS for that information. - -* The DaaS asks the user, OAuth style, whether the user is ok with giving the - platform that information. - -* If so, the platform is given that information. - -This is a tricky situation. It adds a lot of liablity for the user, since their -raw data will be stored with the DaaS, ripe for hacking. It also places a lot of -trust with the DaaS to be responsible with users' data and not go giving it out -willy-nilly to others, and instead to only give out the bare-minimum that the -user allows. Since the user is not the DaaS' direct customer, this might be too -much to ask. Nevertheless, it's a use-case which is worth thinking about. - -## Dapps - -The idea of decentralized applications, or dapps, has begun to gain traction. -While not mainstream yet, I think they have potential, and it's necessary to -discuss how a DaaS would operate in a world where the internet is no longer -hosted in central datacenters. - -Consider an Ethereum-based dapp. If a user were to register one ethereum address -(which are really public keys) with their DaaS account, the following use-case -could be implemented: - -* A charity dapp has an ethereum contract, which receives a call from an - ethereum address asking for money. The dapp wants to ensure every person it - sends money to hasn't received any that day. - -* The DaaS has a separate ethereum contract it manages, where it stores all - addresses which have been registered to a user. There is no need to keep any - other user information in the contract. - -* The charity dapp's contract calls the DaaS' contract, asking it if the address - is one of its addresses. If so, and if the charity contract hasn't given to - that address yet today, it can send money to that address. - -There would perhaps need to be some mechanism by which a user could change their -address, which would be complex since that address might be in use by a dapp -already, but it's likely a solvable problem. - -A charity dapp is a bit of a silly example; ideally with a charity dapp there'd -also be some mechanism to ensure a person actually _needs_ the money. But -there's other dapp ideas which would become feasible, due to the inability of a -person to impersonate many people, if DaaS use becomes normal. - -## Why Did I Write This? - -Perhaps you've gotten this far and are asking: "Clearly you've thought about -this a lot, why don't you make this yourself and make some phat stacks of cash -with a startup?" The answer is that this project would need to be started and -run by serious people, who can be dedicated and thorough and responsible. I'm -not sure I'm one of those people; I get distracted easily. But I would like to -see this idea tried, and so I've written this up thinking maybe someone else -would take the reins. - -I'm not asking for equity or anything, if you want to try; it's a free idea for -the taking. But if it turns out to be a bazillion dollar Good Idea™, I won't say -no to a donation... |