Distribute frozen federation corpus by concept destination
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 1s

Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a070b5-4994-7271-bd8b-7c3dbcedec4b
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-09-06 00:44:37 +02:00
parent 3e3191549a
commit 372f671eef
81 changed files with 14146 additions and 99 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
# W3C DID Core
## Source Type
Standard. W3C Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0 Core.
## Domain
Decentralized identifiers, verifiable identity subjects, DID documents, and
verification methods.
## Why This Source Matters
DIDs provide externally controlled identifiers with cryptographic verification
methods, relevant to portable identity, issuer independence, and synonymity
across systems.
## Key Concepts
- **DID**: globally unique URI following `did:method:identifier` syntax.
- **DID subject**: entity identified by a DID; may be person, org, or thing.
- **DID controller**: entity authorized to change DID document (may differ from
subject).
- **DID document**: JSON-LD document resolved from DID; contains verification
methods, services, and controllers.
- **Verification method**: cryptographic key or proof mechanism for authentication
or signing.
- **Service endpoint**: machine-readable service URL in DID document.
- **DID method**: specific ledger or resolution rules (`did:web`, `did:key`,
`did:ion`, etc.).
- **Resolution**: process of retrieving DID document from DID URL.
- **Also-known-as / equivalentId**: related identifier properties (method-specific).
- **Delegation**: controller grants another party control via verification
relationship.
## Relevant Terminology
| Term | Source meaning |
| --- | --- |
| DID | Decentralized identifier string. |
| DID subject | Entity the DID names. |
| DID controller | Party that can update DID document. |
| DID document | Resolved metadata about DID. |
| Verification method | Key/material for prove/control. |
| Service | Endpoint declaration in document. |
| DID method | Resolution and registry rules. |
| Resolve | Fetch DID document. |
| Controller | Authority over DID lifecycle. |
| Subject (DID) | Identified party; not necessarily controller. |
## Modeling Assumptions
- **Identifier is primary**; subject is named by DID, not stored in central directory.
- **Control is cryptographic** via verification methods and controllers.
- **Subject and controller may diverge** (custodial wallets, organizational DIDs).
- **DID document is mutable** under controller authority.
- **Methods vary in persistence, privacy, and registry model.**
- **No built-in person/account distinction**; semantics are method and usage dependent.
- **Relationships to other DIDs** may appear as services or custom properties.
## Identity-Canon Implications
- **DID** maps to **Identifier** (decentralized, resolvable).
- **DID subject** maps to **Actor** or target of **Claim** depending on usage.
- **DID controller** maps to **Representation** or **Ownership** relationship
over identifier control.
- **Verification method** maps to **Credential** (cryptographic).
- **DID document** maps to **Profile** / metadata record for Identifier.
- **Service endpoint** maps to operational binding (downstream).
- DID-based strong binding supports S13 (verified link), S14 (pseudonymous
scoped identity when using pairwise/privacy-preserving methods).
- Reinforces **P8** (evidence via cryptographic verification).
## Terminology Conflicts
- **Subject**: DID subject vs. OIDC sub vs. authorization subject.
- **Controller vs. Owner**: controller is key/document authority; owner is
broader relationship.
- **Identity vs. DID**: DID is identifier, not identity record.
- **Credential vs. Verification method**: verification method is key material;
VC is claim artifact.
- **Resolve vs. Lookup**: resolution is method-specific; not uniform directory.
## Candidate Canonical Mappings
| DID Core concept | Candidate canonical concept |
| --- | --- |
| DID | Identifier |
| DID subject | Actor (context-dependent) |
| DID controller | Representation or Ownership Relationship |
| DID document | Profile / Identifier metadata record |
| Verification method | Credential |
| Service endpoint | Operational binding (downstream) |
| DID method namespace | Scope (method-specific) |
| Resolution result | Evidence Source |
| equivalentId / alsoKnownAs | Synonymity Assertion (method-dependent) |
## Open Questions
- Should DID be a distinct Identifier subtype with method and resolution metadata?
- How should subject/controller split map for organizational vs. personal DIDs?
- Does equivalentId warrant weak or strong Synonymity by default?
- How do DID methods with pairwise features (e.g., did:ion pairwise) map to
Scoped Identifier?
## References
- W3C DID Core v1.0 — https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/
- DID Specification Registries — https://www.w3.org/TR/did-spec-registries/

View file

@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
# OpenID for Verifiable Credentials (OpenID4VC)
## Source Type
Standard suite. OpenID4VCI (issuance), OpenID4VP (presentation), and related
OAuth 2.0 profiles for verifiable credentials.
## Domain
VC issuance and presentation protocols, wallet-holder flows, and federation of
verifiable credential ecosystems.
## Why This Source Matters
OpenID4VC bridges OAuth/OIDC infrastructure with W3C Verifiable Credentials,
connecting federation protocols to portable claim semantics.
## Key Concepts
- **OpenID4VCI**: issuer-to-holder credential issuance using OAuth 2.0 access
tokens and credential offers.
- **OpenID4VP**: holder-to-verifier presentation using authorization requests
and VP tokens.
- **Credential Issuer**: OIDC/OAuth entity issuing VCs.
- **Wallet / Holder**: stores credentials and responds to presentation requests.
- **Verifier**: requests and validates presentations.
- **Credential Offer**: deeplink/URI initiating issuance to wallet.
- **Proof of possession**: holder proves control of key bound to credential.
- **Authorization Request (VP)**: verifier specifies required credential types.
- **SD-JWT VC**: selective disclosure JWT credential format (parallel track).
- **mDL / ISO 18013-5**: mobile document format integrated in some profiles.
## Relevant Terminology
| Term | Source meaning |
| --- | --- |
| Credential Issuer | OAuth/OIDC party issuing VCs. |
| Wallet | Holder software storing VCs. |
| Verifier | Party requesting VP from wallet. |
| Credential offer | Issuance initiation artifact. |
| Authorization request | Presentation request to wallet. |
| VP token | Presentation response token. |
| c_nonce | Issuance proof challenge. |
| format | VC encoding (jwt_vc, ldp_vc, sd-jwt). |
| credential_definition | Type/filter for requested credential. |
| presentation_definition | Verifier's input requirements. |
## Modeling Assumptions
- **Issuance is OAuth-mediated** between issuer, wallet, and optional broker.
- **Presentation is verifier-driven** with explicit requested claim types.
- **Holder wallet is trust boundary** for credential storage and selective disclosure.
- **OIDC identity may bootstrap wallet** or issuer trust.
- **Multiple credential formats** coexist (JWT, JSON-LD, SD-JWT).
- **Revocation/status checked at verification** time.
- **Pairwise issuance** possible for privacy-preserving credentials.
## Identity-Canon Implications
- OpenID4VCI issuance flow maps to **Credential** creation with **Claim**,
**Issuer** Scope, and **Evidence Source** (issuance event).
- OpenID4VP presentation maps to verifier **Trust Relationship** evaluating
**Credential** + **Claim** subset.
- **Wallet** maps to holder **Actor** + storage **Scope** (custody boundary).
- OIDC authentication preceding issuance maps to **Authenticated Subject** →
**Account** → VC **Subject** binding via **Identifier Binding**.
- Selective disclosure supports S14 (privacy-limited claims).
- Bridges federation (OIDC) and VC layers for S13 strong links.
- Reinforces projection pattern: OIDC for auth, VC for claims.
## Terminology Conflicts
- **Issuer**: OIDC issuer vs. VC issuer — often same entity, different roles.
- **Subject**: OIDC sub in token vs. VC credentialSubject.
- **Credential**: OAuth credential vs. Verifiable Credential.
- **Verifier vs. RP**: overlapping roles with added VP verification.
- **Wallet vs. Account**: wallet is credential store, not always login account.
## Candidate Canonical Mappings
| OpenID4VC concept | Candidate canonical concept |
| --- | --- |
| Credential Issuer | Issuer Scope + Trust Relationship |
| Wallet / Holder | Actor (custody) + Scope |
| Verifier | Verifier / RP Scope |
| Issued VC | Credential + Claim |
| Credential offer | Evidence Source (issuance initiation) |
| Presentation | Credential presentation (operational) |
| OIDC auth prior to issuance | Authenticated Subject → Identifier Binding |
| presentation_definition | Verifier policy (downstream) |
| SD-JWT selective disclosure | Privacy-limited Claim exposure |
| Status check | Lifecycle State verification |
## Open Questions
- Should wallet custody be a canonical Scope specialization (Holder Scope)?
- How should OIDC sub to VC subject binding strength be classified (weak vs.
strong Synonymity)?
- Does OpenID4VP verifier policy belong in canon or strictly downstream?
- Should SD-JWT credentials map to Credential subtype with disclosure metadata?
## References
- OpenID4VCI — https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html
- OpenID4VP — https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-presentations-1_0.html
- OpenID4VCI SD-JWT profile — https://openid.net/specs/openid-4-verifiable-credential-issuance-1_0.html#name-sd-jwt-vc

View file

@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
# W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model 2.0
## Source Type
Standard. W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model 2.0 (WD/CR as applicable).
## Domain
Verifiable claims, issuers, holders, verifiers, credential lifecycle, and
portable identity assertions.
## Why This Source Matters
Verifiable Credentials formalize issuer-holder-verifier semantics for portable,
cryptographically verifiable claims about subjects — central to evidence-based
identity modeling.
## Key Concepts
- **Verifiable Credential (VC)**: tamper-evident credential making claims about
a subject, signed by issuer.
- **Verifiable Presentation (VP)**: bundle of VCs (and proofs) presented by holder
to verifier.
- **Issuer**: entity that asserts claims and signs VC.
- **Holder**: entity possessing VC (may or may not be subject).
- **Verifier**: entity checking VC/VP validity.
- **Subject**: entity claims are about (`credentialSubject`).
- **Claim**: individual statement within credentialSubject.
- **Proof**: cryptographic proof of integrity and issuer authenticity.
- **Credential schema**: type and structure definition for VC.
- **Status**: revocation/suspension via StatusList2021 or similar.
- **ValidFrom / ValidUntil**: temporal validity window.
- **Evidence**: supporting documents referenced in VC (DID, attachments).
## Relevant Terminology
| Term | Source meaning |
| --- | --- |
| Verifiable Credential | Signed claim set about subject. |
| Presentation | Holder-submitted package for verification. |
| Issuer | Signing authority for claims. |
| Holder | Party storing/presenting VC. |
| Verifier | Party validating VC/VP. |
| Subject | Entity described by credentialSubject. |
| credentialSubject | Claim object about subject. |
| Proof | Cryptographic verification data. |
| StatusList | Revocation/suspension mechanism. |
| type | VC semantic type(s). |
| validFrom / validUntil | Temporal bounds. |
## Modeling Assumptions
- **Claims are assertions, not ground truth** until verified by verifier policy.
- **Issuer authority is explicit** and cryptographically attributable.
- **Holder may differ from subject** (custodial credentials).
- **Revocation is first-class** via status mechanisms.
- **Temporal validity matters** for employment, membership, age claims.
- **Selective disclosure** may hide parts of credentialSubject (privacy).
- **Subject may be identified by DID, URI, or other identifier.**
## Identity-Canon Implications
- **VC** maps to **Credential** containing **Claim** set.
- **credentialSubject** claims map to individual **Claim** objects about
**Actor**, **Membership**, or attributes.
- **Issuer** maps to issuer **Scope** + **Trust Relationship**.
- **Holder** maps to **Actor** or **Account** holding credential.
- **Verifier** maps to relying party evaluating Trust + Evidence.
- **Subject** maps to **Actor** or Identifier target.
- **Status/revocation** maps to **Lifecycle State** on Credential/Claim.
- **validFrom/validUntil** map to relationship/assertion temporal bounds.
- Supports S13 (strong verified link), S03 (org membership claims), S06
(guardian credentials if issued).
- Reinforces **P7** and **P8**: claims are evidenced assertions.
## Terminology Conflicts
- **Credential vs. Credential (auth)**: VC vs. password/OIDC token.
- **Subject**: VC subject vs. OIDC sub.
- **Claim vs. Attribute**: VC claim vs. directory/LDAP attribute.
- **Holder vs. Account**: holder is possession role, not login account.
- **Verifier vs. RP**: overlapping but VC adds cryptographic verification step.
## Candidate Canonical Mappings
| VC Data Model concept | Candidate canonical concept |
| --- | --- |
| Verifiable Credential | Credential |
| credentialSubject claim | Claim |
| Issuer | Issuer Scope + Trust Relationship |
| Holder | Actor / Account (possession role) |
| Verifier | Relying party / verifier Scope |
| Subject | Actor or Identifier target |
| Proof | Evidence Source (cryptographic) |
| StatusList entry | Lifecycle State (revoked/suspended) |
| validFrom / validUntil | Temporal bounds on Claim |
| Presentation | Credential bundle (operational) |
## Open Questions
- Should canon treat VC as Credential subtype or parallel Claim container?
- How should membership VCs map to Membership Relationship vs. Claim only?
- Does selective disclosure require Persona or Scoped Identifier linkage?
- Should issuer DID vs. issuer URL be standardized Identifier forms?
## References
- W3C VC Data Model 2.0 — https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model-2.0/
- VC Data Model 1.1 (widely deployed) — https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/
- Status List 2021 — https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-status-list-2021/