You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
that only x509 and .well-known/jwt-issuer MUST be supported
At the same time I have the "perception" that Federation has a higher level for the attestation of requirements and keys, since it brings metadata, policy and custom attestations (trust marks), and that todate we don't have clear requirements to compare x509 or .well-known/jwt-issuer more or less high.
Since this new specification is dedicated to the High profile, I think it is appropriate to do a PR to obtain the JWS trust_chain header parameter within this new profile
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I read here
https://github.com/vcstuff/high-assurance-profile/blob/main/draft-high-assurance-profile-oid4vc-sd-jwt-vc.md#issuer-identification-and-key-resolution-to-validate-an-issued-credential-issuer-key-resolution
that only x509 and .well-known/jwt-issuer MUST be supported
At the same time I have the "perception" that Federation has a higher level for the attestation of requirements and keys, since it brings metadata, policy and custom attestations (trust marks), and that todate we don't have clear requirements to compare x509 or .well-known/jwt-issuer more or less high.
Since this new specification is dedicated to the High profile, I think it is appropriate to do a PR to obtain the JWS
trust_chain
header parameter within this new profileThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: