Session Date/Time: 24 Jul 2024 16:30

diem

Summary

The Digital Emblem BoF explored the problem space, potential solutions, and the suitability of the IETF for standardizing digital emblems. The session highlighted diverse use cases, ranging from protecting humanitarian assets in cyber space (ICRC's primary focus) to facilitating customs clearance and combating counterfeiting. A key point of discussion was the need to clarify the scope and potentially pursue separate work streams to address the specific requirements of different use cases.

Key Discussion Points

Problem Statement: Preventing loss of life in conflict/disaster areas due to lack of information and protecting humanitarian infrastructure in cyber space.
ICRC's Digital Emblem Project: Focuses on digital infrastructure and digital assets, seeking to replicate the protective function of the Red Cross emblem in cyberspace, primarily to identify assets that should not be targeted during cyber operations.
Journalist Safety: Digital emblems could potentially enhance journalist safety in conflict zones and streamline customs processes for equipment.
Broader Applications: Potential for digital emblems in customs clearance, supply chain management, and combating counterfeiting.
Authenticity and Non-Repudiation: Establishing trust in digital emblems and ensuring accountability for their use were raised as important considerations.
Removability and Covert Inspection: Key requirements for digital emblems related to protection. Need for ability to remove an emblem and covert inspection, so that verifiers are not signaling that they are attackers.
Scope Definition: There was a lengthy discussion regarding whether to adopt a broad scope encompassing various use cases or to narrowly focus on specific areas, such as the ICRC's humanitarian use case.
Existing Work and Potential for Collaboration: Participants identified existing work in the IETF (e.g., SPICE, DRIP, verifiable credentials) and other organizations (e.g., ISO) that could be leveraged.

Decisions and Action Items

Decision: Proceed with further discussion on the mailing list ([email protected]) to propose specific work items suitable for the IETF.
Action Item: Rohan to send a mail to the mailing list with a taxonomy of terms.

Next Steps

Proponents to refine problem statements and propose specific work items, including draft charters, on the [email protected] mailing list.
Explore whether two separate working groups might be necessary.
Consider a side meeting to obtain more detailed feedback from the identity community.
Investigate existing work in other standards organizations (e.g., ISO) to avoid duplication of effort.