From identity obsession to the logic of authorization: Why the concept of "Know Your Rights" (KYR) is the answer to the dead end of modern data protection.
Anyone opening a bank account these days, registering for a car-sharing app, or simply wanting to voice an opinion in an online forum inevitably encounters three letters: KYC. Know Your Customer. What once began as a protective measure against money laundering in the high-finance sector has spread like digital mildew over our entire online lives. The premise is as simple as it is radical: trust is only granted in exchange for total disclosure.
The Structural Problem of Forced Identity
The issue with classic KYC systems is not their intent, but their architecture. They are a relic of a time when trust was managed centrally. In this logic, identity is the only currency. This leads to a massive structural problem: the principle of data minimisation is confronted by a hunger for metadata.
Every time we reveal our identity to obtain an authorization, we leave a "data shadow." This information is stored on central servers which—as the headlines of recent years show—regularly become targets for hacker attacks. We risk our entire digital identity just to prove we are authorized to watch a movie or cast a vote.
KYR: The Paradigm Shift
This is where a concept comes into play that is gaining importance within the context of Infinity Economics 2.0: KYR – Know Your Rights.
The decisive difference lies in the question being asked. While KYC asks, "Who are you?", KYR asks, "What are you allowed to do?". It is the difference between a bouncer reading your birth certificate and a lock that checks if your key fits.
In a KYR world, authorization is decoupled from the individual. The ticket is the proof of your right. KYR transfers this principle of "controlled anonymity" into the digital space.
E-Commerce Scene: The Discreet Purchase
In modern online retail, the craze for data collection is almost ritualistic. Anyone ordering an item for ages 18 and up often has to upload their ID or go through a "Post-Ident" process. The merchant then stores highly sensitive documents that are completely irrelevant to the actual trade—the exchange of money for goods.
With KYR, the process changes: a verified TrustCenter simply confirms to the merchant: "Yes, this user is of legal age and the payment is covered." The merchant receives a cryptographic proof, but no name, no date of birth, and no copy of an ID. The risk of data leaks for the merchant drops to zero because they no longer possess any sensitive identity data.
Social Media Scene: Reputation Without Real Names
The debate over real-name requirements in social networks is as old as Web 2.0. Critics demand it to combat hate speech; proponents of anonymity see it as a danger to informants and whistleblowers. KYR offers an elegant third way.
Imagine a platform based not on identity, but on "certified reputation." A user could prove they are a real human and not a bot farm, or that they have been participating constructively in DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) for years. The system checks the eligibility to participate based on these characteristics without requiring a real name. Accountability is created here through the use of reputation—not through the threat of digital surveillance.
Trust Through Mathematics Instead of Surveillance
The technical implementation of KYR is based on cryptographic processes that make it possible to prove truths without revealing the underlying data. Within the IE ecosystem, the ieTrustCenter takes on the role of the authenticator. It acts as a kind of filter that only allows the necessary "Yes/No" answers to pass through.
The result is a framework of trust that functions without surveillance. It is an architecture where data protection does not have to be enforced by laws but is already built into the code. This is known as Privacy by Design.
The New Division of Roles: KYC vs. KYR
From a journalistic perspective, it would be an oversimplification to portray KYC as the "big bad wolf" and KYR as the "savior." The reality is more nuanced. KYC will retain its place where identity must legally be linked to an action—such as buying real estate or in state legal transactions.
However, for 90% of our digital interactions, KYR is the superior model. It reorganizes the relationship:
KYC serves identification (Who is this?).
KYR serves authorization (What is this person allowed to do?).
By combining both concepts depending on the situation, we regain sovereignty over our data.
Conclusion: Freedom Through Clever Limitation
The development of IE 2.0 shows that we are at a turning point. The era in which we had to pay for every bit of convenience with our privacy is coming to an end. Freedom in the digital age does not arise from the complete absence of rules, but from an architecture that enables trust without making the participants transparent.
KYR is more than just a technical protocol. It is a social statement for self-determination. It is the realization that a system that does not have to constantly monitor its users is ultimately the more stable and trustworthy one.
