| Internet-Draft | Identity Verification Methods Values | July 2026 |
| Agarwal & Jones | Expires 7 January 2027 | [Page] |
Knowing how a person's identity was verified can be important when making trust decisions. This specification defines a claim and values for declaring how the person's identity was verified.¶
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.¶
The latest revision of this draft can be found at https://skyfire-xyz.github.io/draft-skyfire-oauth-id-verification/draft-skyfire-oauth-id-verification.html. Status information for this document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-skyfire-oauth-id-verification/.¶
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/skyfire-xyz/draft-skyfire-oauth-id-verification.¶
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 7 January 2027.¶
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
Knowing how a person's identity was verified can be important when making trust decisions. This specification defines the Identity Verification Methods (ivm) claim and values for it for declaring how the person's identity was verified. It also creates a registry for Identity Verification Methods Values and initializes the registry with the values defined in this specification.¶
While this claim and values are general purpose and can be used in any JSON Web Token (JWT) [RFC7519], one use case for them is use in KYAPay tokens [I-D.skyfire-oauth-kyapay-token].¶
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
This section defines the "ivm" (Identity Verification Methods claim and values used with it to indicate that particular identity verification methods were used. In many ways, this parallels the "amr" (Authentication Methods References) claim defined in [OpenID.Core]. Like "amr", "ivm" is a JWT claim whose value is an array that lists a set of methods that were used, in this case, as identity verification methods, rather than authentication method references.¶
The "ivm" (Identity Verification Methods claim is a JSON array of case-sensitive strings that are identifiers for identity verification methods used. For instance, values might indicate that both physical document verification and database PII verification methods were used. Values used in the "ivm" claim SHOULD be from those registered in the IANA "Identity Verification Methods" registry established by (#ivmRegistry); parties using this claim will need to agree upon the meanings of any unregistered values used, which may be context specific.¶
The following Identity Verification Method values are defined by this specification.¶
Database Verification of PII (match of name/address/dob/ssn/nid etc. in consumer reporting data sources)¶
Digital ID Document Verification (for example Mobile Driver's Licenses)¶
Physical ID Document Verification (for example via a real time capture of the front and back of DL or Passport photo page)¶
Secondary Document Verification (for example via bank statements, financial statements, utility bills, government-issued papers, etc.)¶
The security considerations defined in JSON Web Token (JWT) [RFC7519] apply to this specification.¶
The privacy considerations defined in JSON Web Token (JWT) [RFC7519] apply to this specification.¶
This specification registers the following Claim in the IANA "JSON Web Token Claims" [IANA.JWT.Claims] established by [RFC7519].¶
This specification establishes the IANA "Identity Verification Methods" registry
for ivm claim array element values.
The registry records the Identity Verification Method value
and a reference to the specification that defines it.
This specification registers the Identity Verification Method values
defined in (#ivmValues).¶
Values are registered on an Expert Review [RFC5226] basis after a three-week review period on the <jwt-reg-review@ietf.org> mailing list, on the advice of one or more Designated Experts. To increase potential interoperability, the Designated Experts are requested to encourage registrants to provide the location of a publicly accessible specification defining the values being registered, so that their intended usage can be more easily understood.¶
Registration requests sent to the mailing list for review should use an appropriate subject (e.g., "Request to register Identity Verification Method value: example").¶
Within the review period, the Designated Experts will either approve or deny the registration request, communicating this decision to the review list and IANA. Denials should include an explanation and, if applicable, suggestions as to how to make the request successful. Registration requests that are undetermined for a period longer than 21 days can be brought to the IESG's attention (using the iesg@ietf.org mailing list) for resolution.¶
IANA must only accept registry updates from the Designated Experts and should direct all requests for registration to the review mailing list.¶
It is suggested that the same Designated Experts evaluate these registration requests as those who evaluate registration requests for the IANA "Authentication Method Reference Values" registry [IANA.AMR].¶
Criteria that should be applied by the Designated Experts include determining whether the proposed registration duplicates existing functionality; whether it is likely to be of general applicability or whether it is useful only for a single application; whether the value is actually being used; and whether the registration description is clear.¶
The name requested (e.g., "dig") for the authentication method or family of closely related authentication methods. Because a core goal of this specification is for the resulting representations to be compact, it is RECOMMENDED that the name be short -- that is, not to exceed 8 characters without a compelling reason to do so. To facilitate interoperability, the name must use only printable ASCII characters excluding double quote ('"') and backslash ('\') (the Unicode characters with code points U+0021, U+0023 through U+005B, and U+005D through U+007E). This name is case sensitive. Names may not match other registered names in a case-insensitive manner unless the Designated Experts state that there is a compelling reason to allow an exception.¶
Brief description of the Identity Verification Method (e.g., "Physical ID Document verification").¶
For Standards Track RFCs, state "IETF". For others, give the name of the responsible party. Other details (e.g., postal address, email address, home page URI) may also be included.¶
Reference to the document or documents that specify the parameter, preferably including URIs that can be used to retrieve copies of the documents. An indication of the relevant sections may also be included but is not required.¶
[[ to be removed by the RFC Editor before publication as an RFC ]]¶
-00¶
Initial draft.¶