Skip to content

Conversation

@tlodderstedt
Copy link
Contributor

resolves #189

@tlodderstedt
Copy link
Contributor Author

I considered adding a bullet that the profile also give the holder (some) assurance about the identity of the verifier she discloses her credential data to.

Any thought?


This document defines a set of requirements for the existing specifications to enable interoperability among Issuers, Wallets and Verifiers of Credentials where a high level of security and privacy is required. This document is an interoperability profile that can be used by implementations in various contexts, be it a certain industry or a certain regulatory environment.

The meaning of "high assurance" in the context of this profile is:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are many concepts in the description here that I do not see in the HAIP profiles. Where are the requirements mentioned about:

  • Policies and procedures
  • Holder authentication / Holder binding
  • Claim authenticity

Copy link
Contributor Author

@tlodderstedt tlodderstedt Sep 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

HAIP defines on a technically level how holder authentication can be proved and claim authenticity is protected by way of requiring certain protocol and credential format features.
Out of scope are concrete holder authentication mechanisms (which ensure the holder can only sign the presentation) and policies and procedures (as this is a technical interop profile and not a policy definition).
Shall we add this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

added suggest text to the PR
@andprian please review

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@tlodderstedt There is currently some confusion in the EU on the link between the HAIP profiles and the LoA High attainment. Could you clarify that while HAIP provides a good basis, it is not sufficient and extra elements that are out of scope would be needed for LoA High

tlodderstedt and others added 2 commits September 13, 2025 12:27
Co-authored-by: Kristina <52878547+Sakurann@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Frederik Krogsdal Jacobsen <fkj@users.noreply.github.com>
@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

Sakurann commented Oct 2, 2025

WG discussion: @andprian to propose a text that high assurance here is not EU LoA High

tlodderstedt and others added 4 commits October 2, 2025 17:50
Co-authored-by: Frederik Krogsdal Jacobsen <fkj@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Frederik Krogsdal Jacobsen <fkj@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Kristina <52878547+Sakurann@users.noreply.github.com>
@Sakurann Sakurann assigned andprian and unassigned scvenema and Sakurann Oct 2, 2025
@andprian
Copy link
Contributor

andprian commented Oct 3, 2025

WG discussion: @andprian to propose a text that high assurance here is not EU LoA High

@tlodderstedt , I suggest the following additional note:

Note: This specification does not correspond to the "High" Level of Assurance (LoA) as defined in the eIDAS Regulation. While this profile defines features intended for scenarios targeting a high level of security, these measures alone are not sufficient to achieve LoA High compliance. Meeting LoA High requires additional measures outside the scope of HAIP.

@jogu
Copy link
Contributor

jogu commented Oct 3, 2025

Seems reasonable @andprian - I might suggest rewording the first sentence a little as it someone could read it as "HAIP is not suitable for LoA High":

Note: This specification fulfils some, but not all, of the requirements to meet the "High" Level of Assurance (LoA) as defined in the eIDAS Regulation. While this profile defines features intended for scenarios targeting a high level of security, these measures alone are not sufficient to achieve LoA High compliance. Meeting LoA High requires additional measures outside the scope of HAIP.

@andprian
Copy link
Contributor

andprian commented Oct 3, 2025

Seems reasonable @andprian - I might suggest rewording the first sentence a little as it someone could read it as "HAIP is not suitable for LoA High":

Note: This specification fulfils some, but not all, of the requirements to meet the "High" Level of Assurance (LoA) as defined in the eIDAS Regulation. While this profile defines features intended for scenarios targeting a high level of security, these measures alone are not sufficient to achieve LoA High compliance. Meeting LoA High requires additional measures outside the scope of HAIP.

Looks good

@tlodderstedt
Copy link
Contributor Author

@andprian @jogu updated PR to incorporate your proposals. I combined the 2nd and 3rd sentence to make the text more concise.


This document defines a set of requirements for the existing specifications to enable interoperability among Issuers, Wallets and Verifiers of Credentials where a high level of security and privacy is required. This document is an interoperability profile that can be used by implementations in various contexts, be it a certain industry or a certain regulatory environment.

The level of security and privacy defined in this profile includes the following assurance:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"defined" feels a bit awkward. Possibly this is slightly less awkward:

Suggested change
The level of security and privacy defined in this profile includes the following assurance:
This profile aims to achieve a level of security and privacy that includes the following properties:

@Sakurann Sakurann requested review from andprian and scvenema October 7, 2025 11:07
@Sakurann
Copy link
Contributor

Sakurann commented Oct 7, 2025

@andprian @jogu updated PR to incorporate your proposals. I combined the 2nd and 3rd sentence to make the text more concise.

@andprian would be great if you could approve the PR before the WG call. if not, i would take your thumbs up on the Torsten's comment as an approval :)

Copy link
Member

@c2bo c2bo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with @jogu's proposed rewording.


The level of security and privacy defined in this profile includes the following assurance:

* Authenticity of claims: There is strong assurance that the claims within a Credential are valid and bound to the correct Holder. This involves the policies and procedures used to collect and maintain the claims, the authentication of the Holder during issuance, and the protection of claim authenticity both at rest (in the wallet) and during presentation. The scope for this profile is: security of the issuance process, protection of issued credentials, and mechanisms for the Verifiers to access trustworthy information about the Issuer.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Authenticity of claims: There is strong assurance that the claims within a Credential are valid and bound to the correct Holder. This involves the policies and procedures used to collect and maintain the claims, the authentication of the Holder during issuance, and the protection of claim authenticity both at rest (in the wallet) and during presentation. The scope for this profile is: security of the issuance process, protection of issued credentials, and mechanisms for the Verifiers to access trustworthy information about the Issuer.
* Authenticity of claims: There is strong assurance that the claims within a Credential or Presentation are valid and bound to the correct Holder. This involves the policies and procedures used to collect and maintain the claims, the authentication of the Holder during issuance, and the protection of claim authenticity both at rest (in the wallet) and during presentation. The scope for this profile is: security of the issuance process, protection of issued credentials, and mechanisms for the Verifiers to access trustworthy information about the Issuer.

@Sakurann Sakurann merged commit a8adda9 into main Oct 7, 2025
2 checks passed
jogu added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2025
As per #231

Also fix a couple of cases where we didn't use an Oxford Comma (we're
pretty consistent about using them through the rest of the text).
@Sakurann Sakurann added this to the 1.0 Final milestone Oct 9, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

meaning of "high assurance" isn't clear

8 participants