Typos in 2025-probe-security-without-identification post. (#1700)

content/post/2025-probe-security-without-identification/index.md

@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ There is another axis over which credentials can be seen:
   This includes [Bifold](https://github.com/openwallet-foundation/bifold-wallet) and [Aries RFC](https://hyperledger.github.io/aries-rfcs/latest/), both sponsored by the Open Wallet Foundation.
 
 * **Based on Chase–Meiklejohn–Zaverucha** \[[ChaMeiZav14](https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/516), [PoiSan16](https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/1197.pdf)\]. Used in [Signal](https://signal.org/blog/signal-private-group-system/) for private group systems \[[ChaPerZav20](https://signal.org/blog/pdfs/signal_private_group_system.pdf)\], by [NYM Technologies](https://nymtech.net/docs/coconut.html), and Tor for distribution of bridges \[[TulGol23](https://petsymposium.org/popets/2023/popets-2023-0029.pdf)\].
-* **Based on BBS signatures** \[[BonBoySha04](https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/papers/groupsigs.pdf), [TesZhu23b](https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/275)\]. This scheme is by far the oldest and most widely used in the public verification setting. BBS is under consideration of the W3C and the IETF: The W3C hosts multiple efforts in this direction, more specifically on [decentralized identity](https://decentralized-id.com/web-standards/w3c/verifiable-credentials/data-integrity-bbs+/) and [verifiable credentials](https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model-2.0/), and mentions BBS in both of them. The IETF currently has an ongoing proposal for [BBS credentials](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-bbs-signatures/). In addition, BBS has been [suggested](https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/eudi-doc-architecture-and-reference-framework/issues/200) as a solution for the European Digital Identity, it is adopted by [Idemix](https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric/blob/main/docs/source/idemix.rst) for their DLOG credentials (Idemix is also implemented by [IRMA](https://github.com/privacybydesign/irmago)) and [Dock](https://github.com/docknetwork/crypto), a blockchain network that provides reusable digital identification and verifiable credentials.
+* **Based on BBS signatures** \[[BonBoySha04](https://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/papers/groupsigs.pdf), [TesZhu23b](https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/275)\]. This scheme is by far the oldest and most widely used in the public verification setting. BBS is under consideration of the W3C and the IETF: the W3C hosts multiple efforts in this direction, more specifically on [decentralized identity](https://decentralized-id.com/web-standards/w3c/verifiable-credentials/data-integrity-bbs+/) and [verifiable credentials](https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model-2.0/), and mentions BBS in both of them. The IETF currently has an ongoing proposal for [BBS credentials](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-bbs-signatures/). In addition, BBS has been [suggested](https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/eudi-doc-architecture-and-reference-framework/issues/200) as a solution for the European Digital Identity, it is adopted by [Idemix](https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric/blob/main/docs/source/idemix.rst) for their DLOG credentials (Idemix is also implemented by [IRMA](https://github.com/privacybydesign/irmago)) and [Dock](https://github.com/docknetwork/crypto), a blockchain network that provides reusable digital identification and verifiable credentials.
 
 Why would anyone need to present a credential many times? Think about paper identity documents: they are shown many times (but they're also very bad at privacy\!). In OONI, we expect users to submit reports many times, and while we could send a batch of single-show credentials (this is what Cloudflare did in the past with the [Internet Challenge Bypass Privacy Pass](https://research.cloudflare.com/publications/Davidson2018/)), it's not going to be as efficient.