• Korsimoro analytics encourage exploration of the community, operational, and legal dimensions of the global identity ecosystem.
• Korismoro provides technical QA services to improve the health of the digital identity community and to promote widespread adoption of decentralized identity.
• Korsimoro engages in a bit of research and promotes the  levity of identity.

Visualization

• Community Analysis
  What are the personal and organizational relationships in the managed and self-sovereign identity envrionment? How are the participants of theDecentralized Identity Foundationrelated to managed identity and classic IAM systems in government and the private sector? How to projects cluster and what opportunities exist for future integration? Is there a skeletal core to the community and which are lynchpin systems? Which governments are active in promoting self-sovereignty and decentralization and which governments favor centralized identity solutions? How can an investor objectively assess the identity solution employed by each new ICO?
• Accessibility Analysis
  The issue of identity inclusion is receiving a great deal of support from organizations such as the United Nations. Simultaneously, a large number of ICOs promise secure control over your digital life with an unwritten assumption that you are already a cryptocurrency enthusiast and a multi-year vetran of IPFS. Efforts to secure the data flow between your IoT devices and trusted sources, while essential, are not directly relevant to large portions of humanity The need to protect and manage huge swatches of PII is a primarily an issue facing heavily industrialized consumption driven societies. How can we objectively assess the landscape of identity solutions against the true planetary demographics?
• Operations Analysis
  The risks of centrally managed systems or systems controlled by a single organization are well understood. Decentralized systems address those risks, but are subject to the same forces of consolidation, especially when it comes to operations. How do we measure the operational diversity of decentralized systems and equitably compare them with the risks from centralized systems? How can we objectively assess and measure the Diffuse Trust and System Diversity as described in theSovrin Trust Framework, and how can we assess these concepts in other identity systems such as uPort? What dangers lurk in our reliance upon only a small number of smart phone vendors and carriers, and how are they being addressed with advancing technologies like 5G? What transaction volumes are claimed by blockchain solutions and how do those claims match objective measurement and monitoring?
• Legislative Analysis
  Governments and regulatory institutions are currently struggling with contradictory efforts to both promote and compromise individual security. Numerous organizations are engaged on both sides of this battle. Who are they, how are they related, and what are the key elements of legislation in play?

Technical Pragmatics

• Use Cases
  Digital identity is as complex and varied as humanity and it grows ever more complex as organizations, animals, and objects are included. A lack of richly annotated reference cases hinders objective and comparative analysis of the capabilities and liabilities of managed and decentralized identity systems. Alice and Bob simply do not capture the full range of identity configurations, requirements, and relationships and a larger, expanded, reference set is required.
  Furthermore, larger database of reference cases is required for comparative evaluation of legal frameworks such as the Sovrin Trust Framework, domain specific trust frameworks, and the explicit and implicit trust frameworks of blockchain solutions, many of which ultimately rely upon the KYC procedures of cryptocurrency exchanges.
• Wide Adoption
  Deploying testbeds for decentralized identity system development is complicated and is a barrier to the global adoption and deep integration required to reclaim the sovereignty of identity. Tasks such as a functioning Hyperledger environment, spinning up a local, non testchain Bitcoin or uPort IoT testbed, or testing and developing a functioning Universal DID Resolver needs to be as simple asnpm install sdk; npm run setup. By deploying such test systems ourselves, and executing scenarios using the test cases described above, we believe we can lower the barrier to truly wide and uniquitous adoption of the key technologies of decentralized identity.

Research and Miscellany

• Managed/Sovereign Bridge
  Managed identity systems, such as the IAM environments operated by governments and employers, are a vital and integral part of modern life. Regulatory requirements are often at odds with the principles of self-sovereignty, resulting in pragmatically mandatory surrender of sovereignty. While you may choose to participate in social networks or consumer loyalty programs, you may not choose to participate in governmental systems. For pragmatic reasons it may not be possible to opt out of employer IAM systems, resulting in loss of sovereignty in exchange for a paycheck. Cryptographic and technical practice solutions to these problems are well established, but bridging the social gap is a more difficult battle. Through visualization we can identify the points at which governments, regulatory agencies, and employment practices introduce risk and threaten sovereignty. Having done so we can communicate and suggest how to deploy existing technical solutions to maximize individual control over identity while honoring the requirements of governments, regulatory agencies, and corporate IAM.
• Reclusivity Rights
  Reculsivity is a fundamental human right, but is bounded by the social contract. Is it possible to regain reclusivity while supporting the demands of a global society? While GDPR is a first and enlightened step in the right direction, it is not yet a global solution. In fact, it is actively and persistently challenged in autocratic environments and in societies hampered by intrasocial wars and assaulted by politically motivated paranoia and hysteria. In terms of specific institutions and legal frameworks, is it even practical to regain lost reclusivity and if so, how?
• iFreedom - Device Decoupling
  Your identity is a matter of physics and it has no direct relationship to a handheld computer or other device. Over-reliance upon smartphones, software, and hardware gadgetry such as cryptographic processors and embedded biometric sensors, is a serious and blossomming threat to the integrity of personal identity. The physical management of centrally manufactured, heavily monitored, fundamentally insecure, bricks of plastic and metal should never be the foundation upon which a digital identity is anchored. Device reliance has endangered the personal identity of billions through inappropriate cultivation of the myth of device integrity. Many groups and organizations are actively engaged in responding to the threats imposed by governments which continually pressure device manufacturers to weaken privacy protection. The scope and details of this contest can be hard to grasp and will benefit from improved visualization of the key players and contests.
• A Bit of Fun
  Issues of individuality and identity are weighty, so watch for the Korsimoro logo in your environment and engage the levity of identity. We have introduced a physical testbed of non-electronic identities and are in the process of deploying a card based PoC. This silly project, precisely because it involves absolutely no sensitive data, is a fundamental test of the technical reality of bootstrapping and managing a limited identity domain.