Credential Wallet Verification With Granular Context Sharing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Traditional identity and background verification systems are institution-centric, leading to inefficiencies, privacy risks, and lack of user control, with issues in data format compatibility, resilience, consent management, and progressive disclosure.
Innovation Solution
A user-controlled verification and credential sharing system that enables individuals to proactively verify multiple categories of personal information through sophisticated normalization and correlation, multi-layer fallback mechanisms, granular consent management, and context-aware sharing with audit logging.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If traditional institution-centric verification systems are used, then verification processes can be initiated by organizations, but users have no control over their data and must repeatedly undergo the same checks
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs verification in advance and stores results in a user-controlled credential wallet. Users verify their credentials once, and the verified information is stored securely for future use. This preliminary action eliminates the need for repeated verification checks across different institutions, as users can present their pre-verified credentials whenever needed.
Solution Approach 2:
The system creates digital copies of verified credentials in the user's credential wallet. Instead of requiring users to undergo repeated verification processes, the system generates and stores verified credential copies that users can selectively share with institutions. These digital copies serve as sufficient proof without requiring re-verification.
2Reliability
If comprehensive verification of multiple credential categories is performed, then accuracy and reliability improve, but system complexity and data handling difficulty increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments verification into distinct credential categories (identity, employment, education, financial, etc.) that can be independently verified and stored. Each category can be processed separately through dedicated verification providers, allowing the system to manage complexity by dividing the overall verification process into manageable, independent modules while maintaining comprehensive verification coverage.
Solution Approach 2:
The credential wallet acts as an intermediary layer between multiple verification providers and end users. It standardizes data formats from different sources, manages consent workflows, and coordinates verification requests. This intermediary simplifies the system architecture by providing a unified interface that handles the complexity of multi-source verification without requiring direct integration between all components.
3Productivity
If user data is stored centrally for verification purposes, then verification efficiency improves, but privacy risks and security vulnerabilities increase
Solution Approach 1:
Instead of institutions accessing user data directly from centralized storage, the system inverts the model by giving users control over their credential wallet. Users selectively share their verified credentials with institutions on their own terms. This inversion places users in control of data access, reducing privacy risks while maintaining verification efficiency through the use of pre-verified credential copies.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements granular control over data sharing, allowing users to specify exactly which credentials to share with which institutions for specific purposes. Rather than broad centralized access, each credential can be shared selectively with different recipients for different durations. This local quality approach minimizes privacy exposure while maintaining verification efficiency.
4Adaptability or versatility
If granular consent management is implemented for different verification categories, then user privacy control improves, but consent workflow complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The consent management system is segmented by credential category (identity, employment, education, etc.), allowing users to grant or deny consent for each category independently. This segmentation enables fine-grained control over what information is shared with which institutions, while the modular structure keeps the complexity manageable by treating each category as a separate consent unit.
5Reliability
If multiple data sources are integrated for verification, then verification completeness improves, but data format compatibility issues arise
Solution Approach 1:
The credential wallet is designed as a universal container that can store verified credentials from multiple different sources and formats. It implements a standardized internal schema that can accommodate data from various verification providers (government agencies, employers, educational institutions, etc.). This universality allows the system to integrate multiple data sources while maintaining verification completeness, as the wallet handles format conversion and standardization internally.
Data Source
AI summary
A computer-implemented system performs multi-level, user-initiated verification and selective credential sharing. A verification server issues secure API calls to multiple external providers to verify user-selected categories, including identity, employment, financial, education, criminal, court, family, social media, and medical. Provider data is normalized to a common schema, and fallback procedures are applied if primary verification fails. Verified results are stored in a user-controlled credential wallet. The wallet enables creation of share profiles specifying subsets of categories for disclosure in different contexts, each with configurable time limits, revocation rights, and access controls. Secure links or machine-readable codes provide recipient access to only the authorized categories. An immutable audit log records verification events, share profile creation, recipient access, and revocation, enabling compliance and evidentiary tracking while protecting personal data.