ICONLOOP CEO Kim Jonghyup’s Coindesk Interview “If you ask what MyID can solve…”
This article is an English translation of the Coindesk Korea interview with ICONLOOP CEO Kim JongHyup and journalist Jeong Inseon.
All rights to the information below belongs to Coindesk Korea with only translations provided by P-Rep team ICON DAO.
“If you ask what DID service MyID can solve…”
[Interview] ICONLOOP CEO, Kim JongHyup
Blockchain-based DID alliances of Korean companies are launching services one after another. At the center is ICONLOOP, the local startup company leading the MyID Alliance through their commercialized services VistMe, a visitor management system and Broof, a certificate issuing service, and set to launch blockchain-based digital ID service MyID in April.
MyID Alliance, launched late last year, is a digital identity ecosystem-building coalition led by ICONLOOP, with a large number of financial institutions, including local banks and securities firms. It is based on the digital ID technology platform My ID, which was designated as the Financial Services Commission’s Innovative Financial Service in June last year. My ID Alliance’s strategy is to first introduce blockchain-based digital IDs in the highly regulated financial sector, and then gradually expand its reach to other areas. As of the end of January, MyID Alliance has a total of 47 participating companies and agencies.
On the 13th, I met with Kim Jong-hyeop, CEO of ICONLOOP, and learned what kind of digital ID ecosystem ICONLOOP and My ID Alliance are drawing.
-What are the advantages of blockchain-based digital IDs when compared to other existing authentication-related technologies?
= The existing system is focused on authentication. A third party agency or service provider preregisters information to confirm that the person who claims to be ‘A’ is indeed ‘A’. And the next time ‘A’ comes along, it only works within the scope of checking if this is the same person that was registered previously.
On the other hand, DID is a tool that moves away from a single closed identity authentication system. It aggregates different types of identity information, and enables the information to be utilized based on the judgment of the users.
Traditionally, there was a reliable database run directly by a public certification authority or service organization. With all the varying certification authorities, a problem arises where all their individual repositories of information that are scattered around must be trusted. Blockchains and digital IDs, which were originally separate from each other, are now beginning to interconnect.
- There has been some criticism that the concept of data sovereignty puts all the responsibility for information management and protection on individual consumers.
= Although it may seem difficult for individuals to manage their own data, it is actually something they are already doing in the real world. Just not online. For example, many people carry a variety of authentication means in their wallets, such as resident registration and driver’s license, company ID, and apartment keycards. In situations like this, individuals are able to prove themselves directly, by deciding and submitting the information themself. But that’s not the case in the online environment. Online, the “I/Me” is missing in the process. It’s like, leaving your social security card at your local government office and telling them, “My password is 1234, then the office confirms that you are the person you claim to be because you know the password 1234.”
-ICONLOOP’s blockchain-based digital ID-related services include a certificate-issuing service, access control system VisitMe, and information storage application MyID — which is scheduled to be released in April. What kind of ecosystem can these three services build together?
= Although the three services are individually being sent out now, we plan to connect the different services and center them around MyID — which will be released soon. This way, credentials are linked with identification. For example, currently Broof only posts certificates, like diplomas. However, if MyID is connected with Broof or with VisitMe, you can approve that “a user with this specific digital ID has this specific certificate” or “that person is allowed to visit that place”.
A connection like this is a positive factor that encourages non-financial companies that don’t want to feel burdened with personal information management to join the MyID ecosystem. If you take a lot at privacy-related laws, such as CCPA(California Consumer Privacy Act) and GDPR(General European Union Data Protection Regulation), a single personal information-related problem gives corporate businesses a fatal level of fines and penalties.
Since the company is carrying out the project after receiving consent for the use of personal information from customers, the service provider should take full responsibility if there is a problem. However, if the user manages the data directly, the company is only responsible for data the user gives consent to use, and the company does not have to pay attention to the rest.
Take for example Yanolja, a company that has already joined MyID Alliance. When a customer checks in to an Inn, Yanolja only needs to check whether this person is an adult, but under the current system, he or she must have full ID data. As a result, the obligation of the company to protect personal information of its users will also increase.
This is similar to Saramin, a company that recently signed a business agreement with ICONLOOP to utilize blockchain-based certificates. A platform like Saramin only needs to deliver certificate data between job applicants and companies but instead they have to also manage all the related data at the expense of their servers. In the case of certificate data, most of them are image files so the volume of data is extremely large. For problems such as this, there is a high demand for blockchain-based solutions.
-ICONLOOP’s digital ID services, including MyID, are all based on Loopchain, a blockchain developed by ICONLOOP. There are also enterprise blockchain solutions created by big companies like Amazon and IBM, why should corporate customers use Loopchain instead?
= There can be two main aspects of concern that corporate customers may have about Loopchain. First, is that Loopchain isn’t as well-known, and the second is that it is not open source, so contributions can’t be made by outsiders.
Since developing Loopchain from 2016, we have made 3 years-worth of a lot references. So although Loopchain isn’t open source as other well-known blockchain platforms, I think Loopchain has been made more suitable to deal with the enterprise environment.
No company is considering adopting blockchain for just one task. In general, we look at blockchain as a platform for multiple tasks. In that respect, open source blockchain platforms carry more risks.
In the case of Ethereum, forks continue to occur if there is a disagreement with the update. But there are continuous changes in the mainchain of Ethereum, such as changing the consensus algorithm from proof of work (PoW) to proof of stake (PoS), and blockchains made by forking Ethereum too that have to be updated.
For example, when we started developing the loopchain in 2016, it was difficult to implement smart contracts for generating electronic certificates in Ethereum. Companies that develop similar services using R3 or HyperLedger Fabric have only created electronic certificates externally and shared them on the blockchain. Suppose 20 banks each adopt an externally created certificate account(CA) creation solution. If CA solution costs 100 million won (About $100,000 usd) per year, it would cost an additional 2 billion won(About $2 million USD) to implement at all 20 banks.
Loopchain, on the other hand, can decrease that 2 billion won cost because the code to make the certificate itself is inserted as a smart contract. And because it supports smart contracts that require core technologies like this and can customize cores according to business-specific tasks, it is considered competitive.
- Some argue that if a private blockchain specialized for each company is to be operated separately, then a database can just be used.
= Before pointing out that blockchain adoption is relatively inefficient, an understanding of the changing corporate business system is needed. No matter how traditional the industry, there is a value chain. Even for a manufacturing company, from buying raw materials to delivering services, there’s no company that does it all.
Now that almost all business is done on the internet, there are many more stakeholders involved in the final process of creating value for services. And it is difficult to ignore the trust costs of sharing the process with various stakeholders and customers.
Companies must determine how to find the balance between efficiency and trust. And I think companies that are adopting blockchain systems understand this well.
Source: https://www.coindeskkorea.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=70328
Interviewee: ICONLOOP CEO Kim Jonghyup
Interviewer/Author: Jeong Inseon.
Translations: ICON DAO
For more updates on our work as P-Rep or ICON activities in South Korea, please check our twitter and telegram chat linked below. And if you like the work we are doing, vote ICON DAO!
ICON DAO is an ICON Network-based decentralized organization committed to providing the tools and services needed for users to easily develop and manage decentralized communities to collaborate and fund projects.
