Just a funny observation of their terms of use
Ok so what happens if California contracts those China-based databrokers? You can put in your data to remove your personal data in US-California data but then resells them elsewhere to the rest of the world which then cant be redacted anymore because its a Beijing-based or a Shanghai-based company that doesn’t not really answer to an authority outside of China?
I mean does the California government even vet their contractors/subcontractors?
This is probably the kind of thing a digital ID would be good for, so you can verify you’re a resident without revealing anything else.
Isn’t login.gov that?
> What is Login.gov? | Login.gov
No, this is some kind of SSO thing. What I’m talking about is stored locally on your phone or something and you can verify info like your age or citizenship without having to reveal any more info or submit pictures of documents.
>Google Wallet launches new age and identity verification features
No, this is some kind of SSO thing. What I’m talking about is stored locally on your phone or something and you can verify info like your age or citizenship without having to reveal any more info or submit pictures of documents.
Login.gov is an digital ID. The most common¹ term that a digital ID tries to be, is an IDP (Identity Provider). And Login.gov is an IDP. SSO is system for which you need an IDP.
So you are right it is an SSO thing.
Thanks for the clarification I know see what you mean. Since I’m too unfamiliar with the system of login.gov and the US I can’t say if I support your claim or if I support the IAM process involving login.gov. If the law and system is similar to my country (I highly doubt it) I would support the IAM through the digital ID (login.gov for the USA).
1: digital ID is a term that comes from the PR from politician and political parties and doesn’t really have a fixed definition. But most refer to this term in context of an IDP.