-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add text and diagram for siopv2 conditional cred req flow #175
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Kristina <[email protected]>
4. Upon successful authentication, the Wallet sends the Authentication Response back to the Verifier, including the `id_token`. | ||
5. The Verifier validates the `id_token` and extracts the necessary information to identify the user. | ||
6. Based on the user's identity and the Verifier's context, the Verifier determines whether additional credentials are required. | ||
- If no additional credentials are needed, the Verifier proceeds with issuing the authentication token to the user. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what does issuing the authentication token to the user
mean..?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
how would you rephrase this? perhaps If no additional credentials are needed, the Verifier proceeds
or what is the expected action after successful presentation?
5. The Verifier validates the `id_token` and extracts the necessary information to identify the user. | ||
6. Based on the user's identity and the Verifier's context, the Verifier determines whether additional credentials are required. | ||
- If no additional credentials are needed, the Verifier proceeds with issuing the authentication token to the user. | ||
- If additional credentials are required, the Verifier initiates the OpenID for Verifiable Presentations flow by sending a new Authorization Request with the `presentation_definition` or `presentation_definition_uri` parameter. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but sure if it is worth mentioning, but I guess the challenge is how to get this request into the same wallet
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah ... should add more detail here?
a second QR code - or something else?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we might want to tackle it in this issue: #223
Co-authored-by: Kristina <[email protected]>
@@ -823,6 +823,7 @@ This specification defines how the Verifier can determine Credential formats, pr | |||
This specification defines new metadata parameters according to [@!RFC8414]. | |||
|
|||
* `presentation_definition_uri_supported`: OPTIONAL. Boolean value specifying whether the Wallet supports the transfer of `presentation_definition` by reference, with true indicating support. If omitted, the default value is true. | |||
* `conditional_credential_request_supported`: OPTIONAL. Boolean value specifying whether the Wallet supports the conditional credential request flow when combined with SIOPv2. If omitted, the default value is `false`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why is this parameter needed? is it pretty much wallet indicating support for SIOPv2? if so, maybe make that clearer? tho not sure siopv2_supported
makes sense..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it indicates that the wallet may need extra capabilities to handle this optionality
I am open to removing it if you feel it is in unnecessary
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i like the direction and clarification, just have some clarification questions
Fix #86