The Evolution of Identity

Structural Problems in the Web2 Identity System

In the Web2 era, identity is almost entirely tied to platforms. Whether on social media, e-commerce sites, financial services, or content platforms, users must rely on platform accounts to prove who they are. This model has succeeded at scale and delivers a smooth user experience, but its underlying structure hides long-term issues.

First, control over identity rests with the platform—not the user. Although users generate vast amounts of data, they can’t truly decide how it’s stored, used, or transferred. If an account is banned, a platform shuts down, or policies change, both the identity and the credit or assets associated with it can vanish instantly.

Second, the high concentration of identity data creates serious security and privacy risks. Massive volumes of user information are stored in centralized databases, and any breach or misuse can cause irreversible harm. This is a fundamental reason behind frequent privacy scandals in recent years.

Structurally, the Web2 identity system features several key problems:

• Identities are issued and managed by platforms; users lack autonomy
• Data is stored centrally, making it a target for attacks and abuse
• Identities aren’t interoperable across platforms, creating isolated silos
• Platforms hold ultimate authority; users have little recourse or ability to migrate

These issues aren’t flaws of individual platforms but are systemic results of centralized identity models.

What Is Decentralized Identity (DID)?

Decentralized Identity (DID) aims to fundamentally change who controls identity. Unlike traditional account systems, DID doesn’t depend on any single platform or institution for issuance. Instead, identities are generated and verified using blockchain or decentralized networks.

In a DID system, the core of identity isn’t an account—it’s a set of cryptographic credentials controlled by the user. Users can prove their identity with private keys without exposing their full personal information to third parties. This shifts identity from being recognized by platforms to being self-verified by users.

Functionally, DID offers several key features:

• Users generate their own identifiers rather than relying on platform assignment
• Users can manage and authorize access to their own identity data
• Verification processes don’t require centralized intermediaries
• Identities can be reused across different applications and ecosystems

DID doesn’t mean total anonymity. It enables verifiable and selectively disclosed authentication under privacy protection, providing a more flexible foundation of trust for digital society.

The Birth of Self-Sovereign Identity

Building on DID technology, the concept of Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) has taken shape. SSI isn’t about any one specific technology—it represents a shift in ownership and governance philosophy around identity.

The central idea of SSI is that individuals should manage their identities just as they manage assets. Identity no longer belongs to platforms, corporations, or national systems; instead, individuals hold it over time, use it across different scenarios, and authorize access when needed. This transforms identity into a sustainable digital asset rather than a temporary login credential.

Within an SSI framework:

• Users have the rights to create, use, and revoke their identities
• Identities persist across platforms and borders for the long term
• Third parties can only verify specific information with user consent
• The value of identity accumulates through user actions and reputation

This shift means identity moves from being an access tool to becoming a carrier of trust. When identity can embody credit, qualifications, relationships, and historical actions, Web3 gains the real potential to reinvent finance, governance, and social collaboration.