...

...

Overview  

Decentralized Data Governance : for Data subject’s (data) rights

1. A key challenge is found in , which is addressed with an International standards, is the lack of semantic harmonization for personal data control  which provides security for the portability of and control of private information and is required as a precondition to data control and portability. a required for people to be able to independently consent and control personal information.  This challenge, which was originally championed by  the Open Notice Initiative's Presentation and Paper @ the W3C DoNotTrack Conference in Berkeley California. 'Opening Up the Online Infrastructure' called for collaboration on the semantic standards to be developed. Ultimately realizing that intention data governance standards were needed, and international data governance policy was required to govern between jurisdictions, technical domains, and identity management systems.  It was also abundantly clear, the only legal, and human centric framework for this Internationally, is Notice & Consent.  Notice and Consent, after an exhaustive research campaign, Notice, and semantics are the only consistent legal, technical and socially required component, for all contexts dealing with personal information. 
2.  This turned into a Kantara Specification effort in 2014 and now, last year, ISO voted to fast track this to a standard 27560, to be used with ISO 29184 to address what was know by the  phrased of the Biggest Lie on the Internet, was a focus of a movie Terms and Condition's May Apply. With an international governance rule set, people can use independently of Terms and Conditions. 
3. With the success of this work as an international standard this Task Force aims to collaborate to provide the International data governance framework as an open resource for master data control of personal information.
4. The objectives:
   1. Define the attributes needed for a privacy controller credential to extend ISO standards to SSI, 
   2. Use ANCR to specify notice semantics for specifying  Representatives of the controller
5. Develop a unifying approach for the notice semantics internationally with OCA
   1. Provide a common and simple contribution to a unified notice control language, putting together the semantics to include, legal schema, html schema, Jan-ld schema, for the governance and identity management technology,
   2.  Focus this on the use case to use OCA  for semantic harmonization and Notice and Consent receipts to determine
   3. to address this issue a unified notice control language which can be used to address harmonisation of  the notice to indicate which Data Subjects rights apply to which any data processing context, and which  data controls are authorized to be  used linked to the  data controls as authorized by the Data Subject. 
   4. what's involved:whats involved
      1. use/finish the latest Operational Notice & Consent Receipt Specification -Kantara V1.2  that combines the ISO 29100 & 29184 and 27560 -standards comprised of the International privacy security framework (for Soverign data transfer) 
      2. start a generic - unified data control notice schema - mapped to the ISO 29100 framework - 
      3. map/generate a single international baseline overlay - ANCR WG-  ISO 27560 - Notice & Consent Receipt - Record Structure. (click the link for join info)
         

6. Key Points to consider:

   1.  sovereign identity, a data processing activity is based on a data subject’s explicit  or otherwise (human) consent (not internet service /cookie consent),

   2. an individual’s privacy rights need to be extended to proportional digital privacy rights, so an overlay extends the analogue privacy law with a standard digital control semantics with a unified notice control as the language for people to see, understand and control personal data

7. Gaps to cover 
   1. DGA - Architecture
   2. core schema base
   3. what missing in this base? 
      1. Verified Privacy Controller Credential 

   4. Digital Rights usage Challenge

      1. different legal justifications have different rights associated with them.  This makes it very difficult for people and orgs to know what rights apply in any given data control context  - a problem that the can be solved with the use of these standards - 

      2.  e.g. a notice for explicit consent - or legitimate interest?  when does a Data subjects have the right to data portability (Article 20) when is processing is based on consent. When not used on consent- people have  the right to object (Article 21)

      3. the right to withdraw consent may provide a different outcomes - - 

      4. Articles 16 to 20 of the GDPR indicate that (when data processing is based on consent), data subjects have the right to erasure when consent has been withdrawn and the rights to restriction, rectification and access.

8. Gaps to cover 
   1. core schema base
   2. what missing in this base? 
      1. Verified Privacy Controller Credential 
9. Use Cases 
   1. Digital Immunisation Passport
      1. Holder, Verifier & Issuer
   2. Call for use cases.

Unified Notice Control Language for Semantic Harmonization 

...