In the current design, the user who deploys an identity becomes the 1st "owner". The user is not forced to add any more wallets as owners, what happens if the user loses their one wallet and therefore loses their identity and SBTs and tokens inside it.
Possible solutions:
We force a minimum of 3 wallets before identity becomes "active". But this is not good UX
We educate the user that they best have more wallets attached, and it's their risk if they dont
We also have a DAO based "locking" of identities - where user can go to the DAO and make a case, once voted in then the DAO can "lock" the identity via a "kill switch" in the identity contract. Where a certain method called "lockIdentity" can. be called by a DAO smart contract.
Option 3 might be needed at some point so we may need to explore this as a V2 of the identity subsystem.
In the current design, the user who deploys an identity becomes the 1st "owner". The user is not forced to add any more wallets as owners, what happens if the user loses their one wallet and therefore loses their identity and SBTs and tokens inside it.
Possible solutions:
Option 3 might be needed at some point so we may need to explore this as a V2 of the identity subsystem.