Meeting Date

Check the ToIP Calendar for meeting dates.

Zoom Meeting Link / Recording

Attendees

Main Goal of this Meeting

Detailed discussion/planning on proceeding with informal and formal risk assessment of the Attraction Pass ecosystem and use cases

Documents

Agenda Items and Notes (including all relevant links)

TimeAgenda ItemLeadNotes
5 min
  • Start recording
  • Welcome & antitrust notice
  • Introduction of new members
  • Agenda review
Chairs
  • Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
  • New Members:
5 mins

The cleaned-up version of the Zoom meeting transcript, with timestamps removed, speaker contributions grouped, and errors corrected, is presented below. The dialogue has been consolidated for clarity and readability:


  • Neil Thomson highlighted the need to document risks related to the Attraction Pass problem space and use cases used to explore the unique aspects vs. Verifiable Credential handling. It was noted that work that has proceeded to date encountered risks, which were discussed but were not formally assessed (as per the Governance Framework and Risk Assessment Guidelines and had not been formally recorded. He suggested creating a formal risk assessment document, emphasizing the importance of identifying and categorizing potential risks and their impacts. This would be used to formally capture risk assessment done to date, plus do a more comprehensive assessment

  • Scott Perry provided insights into the risk assessment process, stressing the significance of identifying risks to establish appropriate controls within a governance framework. Perry suggested focusing on straightforward, understandable risks, such as preventing duplicate tickets and ensuring tickets are used by the correct individuals at the right time.

  • Tony Sandler raised concerns about the pace of progress and the need to compile a comprehensive list of risks for discussion. He also mentioned the potential benefit of involving Alex Bainbridge for his industry-specific knowledge.

  • Sankarshan discussed the depth of the risk assessment, questioning whether a broad overview or a detailed analysis was preferable. The consensus leaned towards starting with a general assessment and potentially delving deeper as needed.

  • Agreed Actions:

    • Neil Thomson committed to creating and sharing a template for risk assessment, soliciting contributions from Tony, Kabir, Sankarshan, and potentially Alex Bainbridge.
      • Neil Thomson: This has been done and will be distributed immediately. A working notes document has been created in the ToIP  WG Google Drive folder space under Attraction Pass (Risk Assessment sub-folder)
      • Have also included the published GLEIF vLEI Risk Assessment as reference material to the same folder.
    • The group plans to review and populate the risk assessment template over the next two weeks, aiming for a deeper understanding and documentation of risks associated with digital identity systems.
    • A follow-up meeting in two weeks was agreed upon to review progress and further discuss the risk assessment findings.
  • No labels