IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,261,852
Granted Patent B2
US 12,261,852 · App. 18/454,563 · Granted Mar 25, 2025

Systems and methods for managing digital identities

Inventors: Alex Oberhauser (Burlington, MA); Matthew Commons (Cambridge, MA); Alok Bhargava (Newton, MA)
Assignee: Blockchains, Inc.
H04L63/126G06F21/33G06Q10/06G11B20/00086H04L9/3236H04L9/3247H04L63/08H04L9/50H04L2209/56H04N2201/3233
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,261,852
App. No.
18/454,563
Granted
Mar 25, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods for managing digital identities. In some embodiments, a method is provided, comprising acts of: receiving a request to validate at least one statement about a user; identifying, from the request, a reference to a distributed ledger, the reference comprising an identifier for the distributed ledger and an identifier for a transaction recorded on the distributed ledger; identifying, based at least in part on the identifier for the distributed ledger, at least one node of a network of nodes managing the distributed ledger; and communicating with the at least one node to validate the at least one statement about the user.

Claims (106)

1. A computer-implemented method, comprising acts of:

receiving at least one first attestation for at least one attribute of a first entity, wherein the at least one first attestation comprises a first cryptographic proof for the at least one attribute;

determining whether the first cryptographic proof in the at least one first attestation is a valid proof of a purported value of the at least one attribute;

determining whether to trust a second entity indicated as being responsible for veracity of the purported value of the at least one attribute;

determining whether the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity;

determining whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity; and

in response to determining that (1) the cryptographic proof is a valid proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute, (2) the second entity is to be trusted, (3) the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity, and (4) the at least one first attestation has not been revoked by the second entity:

electronically signing at least one second attestation for the at least one attribute of the first entity, wherein the at least one second attestation comprises a second cryptographic proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

information accessed from a distributed ledger is used to determine whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is stored in a badge associated with the first entity;

the act of receiving the at least one first attestation comprises receiving the badge; and

the badge is generated according to a schema selected from a plurality of schemas for badges, the schema comprising a plurality of attributes, the plurality of attributes comprising the at least one attribute.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3 , further comprising an act of:

receiving, from a personal data service (PDS) associated with the first entity, the purported value of the at least one attribute, wherein the PDS is controlled by the first entity via a mobile device.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is referenced by a globally unique identity identifier of the first entity.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5 , wherein:

the first entity is a user, and

the globally unique identity identifier is generated based on one or more biometrics of the user.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

the at least one attribute comprises a first attribute of the first entity,

the first entity has at least one second attribute,

the purported value of the first attribute is derived from a value of the at least one second attribute, and

the value of the at least one second attribute is not received.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the first entity is a user or an organization.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

the second entity electronically signs the at least one first attestation in response to successfully verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute; and

verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute comprises physically examining documentation evidencing the purported value of the at least one attribute.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein:

the act of determining whether to trust the second entity comprises determining whether the second entity is in a list of trusted entities.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising an act of:

sending, to the first entity, a request for the at least one attribute, wherein the at least one first attestation is received in response to the request.

12. A system comprising:

at least one computer processor; and

at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having encoded thereon instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one computer processor to:

receive at least one first attestation for at least one attribute of a first entity, wherein the at least one first attestation comprises a cryptographic proof for the at least one attribute;

determine whether the cryptographic proof in the at least one first attestation is a valid proof of a purported value of the at least one attribute;

determine whether to trust a second entity indicated as being responsible for veracity of the purported value of the at least one attribute;

determine whether the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity;

determine whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity; and

in response to determining that (1) the cryptographic proof is a valid proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute, (2) the second entity is to be trusted, (3) the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity, and (4) the at least one first attestation has not been revoked by the second entity:

electronically sign at least one second attestation for the at least one attribute of the first entity, wherein the at least one second attestation comprises a second cryptographic proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute.

13. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one computer processor is programmed to use information accessed from a distributed ledger to determine whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity.

14. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is stored in a badge associated with the first entity;

receiving at least one first attestation comprises receiving the badge; and

the badge is generated according to a schema selected from a plurality of schemas for badges, the schema comprising a plurality of attributes, the plurality of attributes comprising the at least one attribute.

15. The system of claim 14 , wherein:

the at least one computer processor is further programmed to receive, from a personal data service (PDS) associated with the first entity, the purported value of the at least one attribute; and

the PDS is controlled by the first entity via a mobile device.

16. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is referenced by a globally unique identity identifier of the first entity.

17. The system of claim 16 , wherein:

the first entity is a user, and

the globally unique identity identifier is generated based on one or more biometrics of the user.

18. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one attribute comprises a first attribute of the first entity,

the first entity has at least one second attribute,

the purported value of the first attribute is derived from a value of the at least one second attribute, and

the value of the at least one second attribute is not received.

19. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the second entity electronically signs the at least one first attestation in response to successfully verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute; and

verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute comprises physically examining documentation evidencing the purported value of the at least one attribute.

20. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one computer processor is programmed to determine whether to trust the second entity at least in part by determining whether the second entity is in a list of trusted entities.

21. The system of claim 12 , wherein:

the at least one computer processor is further programmed to send, to the first entity, a request for the at least one attribute; and

the at least one first attestation is received in response to the request.

22. At least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having encoded thereon instructions which, when executed, cause at least one computer processor to perform acts of:

receiving at least one first attestation for at least one attribute of a first entity, wherein the at least one first attestation comprises a cryptographic proof for the at least one attribute;

determining whether the cryptographic proof in the at least one first attestation is a valid proof of a purported value of the at least one attribute;

determining whether to trust a second entity indicated as being responsible for veracity of the purported value of the at least one attribute;

determining whether the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity;

determining whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity; and

in response to determining that (1) the cryptographic proof is a valid proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute, (2) the second entity is to be trusted, (3) the at least one first attestation is electronically signed by the second entity, and (4) the at least one first attestation has not been revoked by the second entity:

electronically signing at least one second attestation for the at least one attribute of the first entity, wherein the at least one second attestation comprises a second cryptographic proof of the purported value of the at least one attribute.

23. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one computer processor to use information accessed from a distributed ledger to determine whether the at least one first attestation has been revoked by the second entity.

24. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is stored in a badge associated with the first entity;

receiving at least one first attestation comprises receiving the badge; and

the badge is generated according to a schema selected from a plurality of schemas for badges, the schema comprising a plurality of attributes, the plurality of attributes comprising the at least one attribute.

25. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 24 , wherein:

the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one computer processor to perform an act of receiving, from a personal data service (PDS) associated with the first entity, the purported value of the at least one attribute; and

the PDS is controlled by the first entity via a mobile device.

26. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the at least one first attestation is referenced by a globally unique identity identifier of the first entity.

27. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 26 , wherein:

the first entity is a user, and

the globally unique identity identifier is generated based on one or more biometrics of the user.

28. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the at least one attribute comprises a first attribute of the first entity,

the first entity has at least one second attribute,

the purported value of the first attribute is derived from a value of the at least one second attribute, and

the value of the at least one second attribute is not received.

29. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the second entity electronically signs the at least one first attestation in response to successfully verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute; and

verifying the purported value of the at least one attribute comprises physically examining documentation evidencing the purported value of the at least one attribute.

30. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one computer processor to determine whether to trust the second entity at least in part by determining whether the second entity is in a list of trusted entities.

31. The at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 22 , wherein:

the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one computer processor to send, to the first entity, a request for the at least one attribute; and

the at least one first attestation is received in response to the request.

Assignments (2)
CONFIRMATORY ASSIGNMENT Recorded Jul 29, 2024
From: CAMBRIDGE BLOCKCHAIN, INC.
To: BLOCKCHAINS, INC.
Reel/Frame 068178/0038 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Apr 24, 2024
From: OBERHAUSER, ALEX; COMMONS, MATTHEW; BHARGAVA, ALOK
To: CAMBRIDGE BLOCKCHAIN, INC.
Reel/Frame 067204/0742 →
Continuity (8)
Continuation 17189064 · Mar 1, 2021
Continuation 15950732 · Apr 11, 2018
Continuation In Part PCTUS2016057232 · Oct 14, 2016
Provisional Application 62380467 · Aug 28, 2016
Provisional Application 62325880 · Apr 21, 2016
Provisional Application 62264418 · Dec 8, 2015
Provisional Application 62241436 · Oct 14, 2015
Related Publication 20240121247A1 · Apr 11, 2024
References Cited (127)
US 6367013B1 · Bisbee et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6553494B1 · Glass · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 6985608B2 · Hoffman et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7162635B2 · Bisbee et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7350074B2 · Gupta et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7523310B2 · Narin et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7610390B2 · Yared et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7703128B2 · Cross et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7802293B2 · Boyer et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7822985B2 · Anstey · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 8316454B2 · Valls Fontanals et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8370631B2 · Pearson · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8566249B2 · Johnson · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8620781B2 · Baumgartner, IV · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8826006B2 · Guo et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 8838503B2 · Pelegero · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9094388B2 · Tkachev · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9176942B1 · McLaughlin · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 9465800B2 · Lacey · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9479337B2 · Metke et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9490984B2 · Leicher et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9536065B2 · Bouse et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9553732B2 · Saboori et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9646150B2 · Toth · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9667427B2 · Oberhauser et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9722790B2 · Ebrahimi · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9749140B2 · Oberhauser et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9768965B2 · Tenenboym et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9830593B2 · Myers · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9832019B2 · Choi · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9876646B2 · Ebrahimi et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 9876775B2 · Mossbarger · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 9959576B2 · Hurry · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 9967334B2 · Ford · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10068228B1 · Winklevoss et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10248783B2 · Costa Faidella et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10340038B2 · Witchey · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10366204B2 · Tanner et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10423961B1 · El Defrawy et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10454689B1 · Sharifi Mehr · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10454899B1 · Gabrielson · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10490304B2 · Shah · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10503916B2 · Murphy et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10535064B2 · Gordon et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10552829B2 · Wilkins et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10592985B2 · Ford et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10621577B2 · Castinado · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 10652239B2 · Jentzsch et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10817967B2 · Chabanne et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 10938835B2 · Oberhauser et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 10963881B2 · Davis · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11012240B1 · Kirsch · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11023968B2 · Arnold et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11210647B2 · Maim · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11212296B2 · Oberhauser et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11777953B2 · Oberhauser et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20020143588A1 · Ishigami · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 20030070072A1 · Nassiri · 2003 [cited by examiner]
US 20040059924A1 · Soto et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20080255990A1 · Moore et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090313129A1 · Rothschild · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20120011029A1 · Thomas · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120054066A1 · Twining · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20150089417A1 · Dayan · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150095999A1 · Toth · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150143129A1 · Duffy · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150302400A1 · Metral · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160260095A1 · Ford · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160283920A1 · Fisher et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160284033A1 · Winard et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160292680A1 · Wilson et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170011460A1 · Molinari et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170091750A1 · Maim · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170103391A1 · Wilson et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170109715A1 · Aguirre et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170141408A1 · Wuehler · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170177855A1 · Costa Faidella et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170222814A1 · Oberhauser et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
CN 1308803A · 2001 [cited by applicant]
CN 101425903A · 2009 [cited by applicant]
CN 101546407A · 2009 [cited by applicant]
CN 103312675A · 2013 [cited by applicant]
JP 2003348077A · 2003 [cited by applicant]
JP 2004213461A · 2004 [cited by applicant]
JP 2005252621A · 2005 [cited by applicant]
JP 2006165881A · 2006 [cited by applicant]
JP 2013137588A · 2013 [cited by applicant]
WO 2015085393A1 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017044554A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017066002A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017079795A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued by International Search Authority on Jan. 19, 2017 for International Application No. PCT/US2016/057232. [cited by applicant]
Github.com. “DIF Identity Hubs.” https://github.com/decentralized-identity/identity-hud/blob/master/explainer.md. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Danny Oquinn. “Identity Blockchain Proof of Concept.” https://sbo.tech/blog/technology-blog-1/post/identity-blockchain-proof-of-concept-3, SBO.tech blog, Jun. 3, 2016, 3 pages. Last retrieved Oct. 23, 2018. [cited by applicant]
Bruno Carneiro. “Identity.com Verifiable Credential Library.” https://github.com/identity=com/credential-commons/blob/master/README.md. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018, 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Sir Tim Berners-Lee. “One Small Step for the Web.” Inrupt Blog, https://www.inrupt.com/blog/one-small-step-for-the-web. Oct. 18, 2018. Last retrieved Feb. 22, 2024, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Henry Tsai. “Sidetree Protocol Specification.” https://github.com/decentralized-identity/sidetree-core/blob/master/docs/protocol.md. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018, 13 pages. [cited by applicant]
Marcus Sabadello. “Universal Resolver—Architecture and Drivers.” https://github.com/decentralized-identity/universal-resolver/blob/master/docs/architecture-drivers.md. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018, 2 pages. [cited by applicant]
Alex Batlin. “Crypto 2.0 Musings—Digital Identity on Blockchain.” LinkedIn-Alex Batlin, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/crypto-20-musings-digital-identity-blockchain-alex-batlin, Sep. 12, 2015, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Alex Oberhauser. “Distributed Hosting: A Blockchain Based Distributed Hosting Engine,” https://blackgate.networld.to/, Mar. 2015, 30 pages. [cited by applicant]
Amit. “12 Companies Leveraging Blockchain for Identification and Authentication.” Let's Talk Payments. Mar. 28, 2016, 2 pages. Last retrieved Jan. 30, 2017. https://letstalkpayments.com/12-companies-leveraging-blockchai… [cited by applicant]
Joe Andrieu, et al. “Verifiable Claims Use Cases. W3W Working Group Note.” https://www.w3.org/TR/verifiable-claims-use-cases, Jun. 8, 2017, 17 pages. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018. [cited by applicant]
Tim Berners-Lee, et al. “Semantic Web Tutorial Using N3,” For Presentation, May 20, 2003. https://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/doc/, 35 pages. [cited by applicant]
John Biggs. “Your Next Passport Could Be On the Blockchain,” TechCrunch, Oct. 13, 2014, 3 pages. https://techcrunch.com/2014/10/31/your-next-passport-could-be-on-the-blockchain/#:˜: text=A%20blockchain%20tinkerer%20name… [cited by applicant]
Christian Lundkvist (ConsenSys). “Digital Identity,” Nov. 2015, 18 pages. Video presentation at DEVCON1 found on YouTube for Ethereum. [cited by applicant]
David G.W. Birch. “Identity Is The New Money,” 2014, 66 pages. Published by London Publishing Partnership. [cited by applicant]
Telis Demos and Emily Glazer. “Banks Have a Solution for Their Identity- Fraud Woes: The DMV.” The Wall Street Journal, Nov. 12, 2018, 3 pages. https://www.wsj.com/articles/banks-have-a-solution-for-their-identity-fraud… [cited by applicant]
William Zac Duffy. “The Top Blockchain Patents of 2018.” Law360, Jan. 7, 2019, 4 pages. https://www.munsch.com/Newsroom/Blogs/108602/The-Top-Blockchain-Patents-of-2018?urlPrefix =../../../&find=108602&printver=true. Ret… [cited by applicant]
Vitalik Buterin. “A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform.” Ethereum White Paper, https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper#identity-and-reputation-systems. Last edited Nov. 21, 2… [cited by applicant]
Thomas Hardjono, et al. “Anonymous Identities for Permissioned Blockchains,” MIT-ChainAnchor-Draft. Jan. 24, 2016, 16 pages. https://www.the-blockchain.com/docs/MIT-ChainAnchor-DRAFT.pdf. [cited by applicant]
John H. Clippinger and David Bollier (Editors). “From Bitcoin to Burning Man and Beyond: The Quest for Identity and Autonomy in a Digital Society.” Published by ID3, Institute for Institutional Innovation by Data-Driven… [cited by applicant]
Dave Longley and Manu Sporny. “Linked Data Proofs 1.0.” Draft Community Group Report, World Wide Web Consortium, Nov. 1, 2018, 14 pages, https://w3c-dvcg.github.io/ld-proofs/. Last retrieved Februray 17, 2019. [cited by applicant]
W. Ian O'Byrne. “Digital Badges Overview.” BadgeChain—Medium. Medium, Mar. 10, 2015. Last retrieved Jan. 8, 2017, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Alex Oberhauser. “A Distributed Computation Engine for Reproducible, Verifiable, Reusable and Transparent Computations.” Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master Science, Vrije Universiteit Amste… [cited by applicant]
Serge Ravet. “From ePortfolios to OpenLedgers-via OpenBadges and BlockChains.” https://medium.com/badge-chain/from-eportfolios-to-openledgers-via-openbadges-and-blockchains-214e5daab558, Dec. 14, 2015, 9 pages. Last ret… [cited by applicant]
Drummond Reed, et al. Decentralized Identifers (DIDs) v0.11. Data Model and Syntaxes for Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs). Draft Community Group Report, Dec. 11, 2018, 41 pages, https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec. Last … [cited by applicant]
Drummond Reed, et al. Decentralized Identifers (DIDs) v0.11. Data Model and Syntaxes for Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs). Draft Community Group Report, Feb. 4, 2019, 42 pages, https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec. Last r… [cited by applicant]
Richard Gendeal Brown. “Identity and The Blockchain: Key Questions We Need to Solve,” Blog post retrieved from https://gendal.me/2014/12/03/identity-and-the-blockchain-key-questions-we-need-to-solve/, 2014, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Markus Sabadello. “A Universal Resolver for self-sovereign identifiers. On any blockchain or other decentralized system.” https://medium.com/decentralized-identity/a-universal-resolver-for-self-sovereign-identifiers-48e… [cited by applicant]
Daniel Burnett, et al. “Verifiable Claims Data Model and Representations.” W3C First Public Working Draft, Aug. 3, 2017, 34 pages. https://www.w3.org/TR/verifiable-claims-data-model/. Last retrieved Dec. 21, 2018. [cited by applicant]
Manu Sporny, et al. “Verifiable Credentials Data Model 1.0, Expressing verifiable information on the web.” W3C Editor's Draft, Jan. 22, 2019, 83 pages. https://w3c.github.io/vc-data-model/. [cited by applicant]
Tim Swanson. “Consensus-as-a-service: a brief report on the emergence of permissioned, distributed ledger systems,” https://www.ofnumbers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Permissioned-distributed-ledgers.pdf, Apr. 6, 2015… [cited by applicant]
Vinay Gupta. “Tell Me Who You Are,” Dec. 23, 2015, 45 pages. [cited by applicant]
Vitalik Buterin. “Ethereum: Platform Review—Opportunities and Challenges for Private and Consortium Blockchains,” Jun. 2, 2016, 45 pages. Retrieved Feb. 28, 2024 from https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/550235-b… [cited by applicant]
Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye, et al. “openPDS: Protecting the Privacy of Metadata through SafeAnswers,” PLOS ONE, Jul. 9, 2014, vol. 8, Issue 7, 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098790. [cited by applicant]
Michael Mainelli and Chiara von Gunten. “Chain of a Lifetime: How Blockchain Technology Might Transform Personal Insurance,” Z/Yen Group, Long Finance, Dec. 2014, 51 pages. [cited by applicant]
Gail L. Grant, “Understanding Digital Signatures”, Excerpts from pp. 33-39, McGraw-Hill, 1998. [cited by applicant]