As currently proposed, the description of the "cryptographic attestation of personhood" proposal (with references to the original sources) would be added in section 2 of the Note, following the treatment of biometric authentication.
Does it more properly belong in section 3 ("multi-party" approaches)?
It seems to me that only two parties are directly involved, the operator of the Web site seeking to verify the user's humanity, and the user. The manufacturer of the user's authentication device is indirectly involved by supplying a certificate that the Web site operator considers it appropriate to rely on. Thus, I would tend to favor "stand-alone", but the distinction isn't as clear as it could be.
As currently proposed, the description of the "cryptographic attestation of personhood" proposal (with references to the original sources) would be added in section 2 of the Note, following the treatment of biometric authentication.
Does it more properly belong in section 3 ("multi-party" approaches)?
It seems to me that only two parties are directly involved, the operator of the Web site seeking to verify the user's humanity, and the user. The manufacturer of the user's authentication device is indirectly involved by supplying a certificate that the Web site operator considers it appropriate to rely on. Thus, I would tend to favor "stand-alone", but the distinction isn't as clear as it could be.