Skip to content

Holder Authentication - Request and Response #47

Open

Description

@Ryang03

Discussion at in-person meeting on 8/31.

The desire is to avoid scenarios where individuals are subjected to server side biometric matching by RPs due to insufficient indications of what authentication occurred. This could be achieve a number of ways, but the intent is to allow for a request and response model where the RP can indicate a preference for a specific holder authentication type. The wallet will then indicate what authentication type occurred or whether the preference was met. If a wallet cannot achieve the desired authentication level the RP can then decide what to do with the information.

This was substantially informed by feedback from US financial institutions over concerns around having no visibility into how the holder is authenticating at transaction time.

Activity

  1. paulbastian commented on Aug 31, 2026

    @paulbastian
    Collaborator

    This was also discussed sometime ago in DCP working group.
    The issue is that this signal only gets reliable, if there is a wallet attestation, which was discussed in length in OpenID4VP and finally rejected.
    So the questions to answer first in my view is: do we want wallet attestations or not?

  2. Ryang03 commented on Oct 26, 2026

    @Ryang03
    Author

    This came up again in a presentation by the PSD2 folks at FIDO authenticate. They are expecting to see this information captured as AMR in OID4VP. Would be good to carve out some more agenda time for this discussion in the future.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions