Self-sovereign identity (SSI)

Self-sovereign identity (SSI) is a concept and model of digital identity where a person owns their data and credentials (diplomas, licenses, membership) themselves and presents them selectively, proving what is needed without disclosing the excess, without dependence on a centralized intermediary platform. Technically SSI is implemented via decentralized identifiers (DID — 1138/1085) and verifiable credentials. Essentially SSI is the ideology of control over one's data, and DID is its tool. Honestly about 'it is a model based on DID', this matters: SSI is not separate magic but a philosophy of self-control over identity, technically relying on DID and verifiable credentials. So all DID limitations apply to SSI (1138/1085): immaturity, fragmentation, responsibility for keys. We honestly do not pass SSI off as something fundamentally different and more ready than DID. Honestly about immaturity, this is key: SSI and its stack are actively developing, but standards are still forming and changing, there are many incompatible implementations, and real adoption is narrow — there are few places where you can present an SSI credential and be accepted. It is a moving, niche field, not a mature standard. Honestly about user responsibility, this is critical: the essence of SSI is control with the user, which means responsibility with them too. Losing the keys/identity wallet = losing control over your credentials without 'recover via support'. For an ordinary person this is a serious barrier and risk that must be honestly built in. Honestly about 'not for most': for the vast majority of ordinary products the usual authentication and data storage are simpler, more mature and sufficient. SSI is justified where self-control over data, portability of credentials between organizations, selective disclosure are genuinely critical — niche, often inter-organizational scenarios. For an ordinary product it is premature. Honestly about 'does not liberate data by itself': SSI gives a control model, but real privacy and benefit depend on the implementation and on whether others accept your credentials. Without an adoption ecosystem SSI is a beautiful idea without practical application. Honestly about the effect: for suitable (often inter-organizational) scenarios SSI gives the user control over data and selective disclosure, but it is an immature model based on DID with serious responsibility for keys and narrow real adoption. Honestly about access: a real need for self-control/portability and readiness for immaturity are required. An important boundary: this is SSI (the model); DID (the tool) — 1138/1085; ordinary authentication — the standard; Web3 login — 1078. The base price starts from 100,000 ₽ (depends on the scenario).

• User control over their data/credentials without an intermediary platform is needed.
• Selective disclosure and portability of credentials between organizations are needed.
• You want SSI for an ordinary product — but it is immature over-engineering.
• Immaturity, responsibility for keys and narrow real adoption are not accounted for.

• SSI implementation based on DID and verifiable credentials (see 1138/1085)
• Selective credential disclosure (prove what is needed without the excess)
• An honest assessment: is SSI needed or is ordinary authentication enough
• Recovery mechanisms and key management (with trade-offs)
• Honest boundaries (a model based on DID with all its limitations; immaturity/fragmentation; responsibility for keys; narrow adoption; not for most; does not liberate data by itself)
• A link with DID (1138/1085) and Web3 login (1078)
• Documentation and handover
• Review with you

• Self-sovereign identity with control and selective disclosure (for suitable scenarios)
• A model based on DID/verifiable credentials
• An honest assessment: for an ordinary product ordinary authentication is better
• Honest boundaries (immaturity; responsibility for keys; narrow adoption; = DID limitations)

• We assess the scenario: is SSI/self-control needed or is ordinary authentication enough
• We implement SSI based on DID/credentials with selective disclosure and key management
• We honestly set boundaries (immaturity, keys, adoption) and hand over to you

• Is SSI something more ready and different from DID?

  No, honestly: SSI is largely a philosophy/model of self-control over identity, and technically it is implemented via DID and verifiable credentials (1138/1085). So all DID limitations apply to SSI: immaturity, fragmentation, responsibility for keys. We honestly do not pass SSI off as something fundamentally different and more mature — it is the same immature field from a different (ideological) angle.

• Does my ordinary product need SSI?

  Rather no, honestly: for the vast majority of ordinary products the usual authentication and data storage are simpler, more mature and sufficient. SSI is justified where self-control over data, portability of credentials between organizations and selective disclosure are genuinely critical — niche, often inter-organizational scenarios. For an ordinary product it is premature and excessive. We will honestly assess whether it is your case.

• Will SSI automatically give privacy and 'liberate' my data?

  No, honestly: SSI gives a control model, but real privacy and benefit depend on the implementation and on whether others accept your credentials. Without an adoption ecosystem SSI is a beautiful idea without practical application. Plus responsibility for keys: loss = loss of control without recovery. We honestly state that SSI by itself does not liberate data and does not guarantee privacy.