1.2.1.1
Participant onboarding: Evaluation - Self-assessment
Assessment: If an onboarding online facility is provided, evaluate the level of customisation required to input participants’ metadata.
The description of Test 1.2.1.1 was extracted from this page in the GitHub repository.
This file was last modified at 2026-06-24 15:37:50 UTC.
Information
-
Phase 1
-
Minimal? Yes
-
Related KPIs:
- Functional suitability: A self-assessment process exists with well-defined inputs and outputs standardised information that will be a relevant part of the profile of the aspiring participant.
-
Evaluation Criteria:
The criteria used to measure the results was the one specified by the Data Product Publication ISO25010 Quality file regarding Functional Suitability.
| Criterion | Description | Score (0-4) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Completeness | Technical requirements cover all the specified tasks and user objectives. | ||
| Functional Correctness | Technical requirements meet results with the needed degree of precision. | ||
| Functional Appropriateness | Technical requirements facilitate the accomplishment of specified tasks and objectives. |
Results
- Fiware
- protoEMDS Final Stack (EDC-based)
- EDC+VC
The results for Test 1.2.1.1 for Fiware were extracted from this page in the GitHub repository.
This file was last modified at 2026-06-24 15:37:50 UTC.
The test is conducted in the IONOS FIWARE_cluster cluster using node pool IP 85.215.161.198.
Tested quality metric and method
The quality metric for this test is based on the criteria outlined in iso27001_kpis_subkpis.xlsx. In Phase 1, the focus is on the Functional Suitability metric. For detailed information, please refer to the Comparative criteria (checklists, ...) section in the test description.
Expected output
How participant onboarding is made.
Results
Assessment
Before participating in a data space, an organization needs to be onboarded at the data space's Participant List Service by registering it as trusted participant. The user invoking the onboarding process needs to present a VC issued by the organization to the user itself, a VC containing the self description of the organization and a VC issued by a trusted Compliancy Service for the organization self description.
The commands used for this process are:
export ACCESS_TOKEN=$(curl --insecure -v -X POST https://keycloak.demo-portal.eu/realms/test-realm/protocol/openid-connect/token \
--header 'Accept: */*' \
--header 'Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded' \
--data grant_type=password \
--data client_id=admin-cli \
--data username=admin-user \
--data password=test | jq '.access_token' -r); echo ${ACCESS_TOKEN}
To Check credential_configuration_id from Keycloak credential issuer info endpoint:
curl --insecure -v -X GET https://keycloak.demo-portal.eu/realms/test-realm/.well-known/openid-credential-issuer
To get the offer URI:
export OFFER_URI=$(curl --insecure -s -X GET 'https://keycloak.demo-portal.eu/realms/test-realm/protocol/oid4vc/credential-offer-uri?credential_configuration_id=natural-person' \
--header "Authorization: Bearer ${ACCESS_TOKEN}" | jq '"\(.issuer)\(.nonce)"' -r); echo ${OFFER_URI}
To get the Pre_authorized_code
export PRE_AUTHORIZED_CODE=$(curl --insecure -s -X GET ${OFFER_URI} \
--header "Authorization: Bearer ${ACCESS_TOKEN}" | jq '.grants."urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:pre-authorized_code"."pre-authorized_code"' -r); echo ${PRE_AUTHORIZED_CODE}
To get the Credential Access Token:
export CREDENTIAL_ACCESS_TOKEN=$(curl --insecure -s -X POST https://keycloak.demo-portal.eu/realms/test-realm/protocol/openid-connect/token \
--header 'Accept: */*' \
--header 'Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded' \
--data grant_type=urn:ietf:params:oauth:grant-type:pre-authorized_code \
--data code=${PRE_AUTHORIZED_CODE} | jq '.access_token' -r); echo ${CREDENTIAL_ACCESS_TOKEN}
To get the Verifiable Credential:
export VERIFIABLE_CREDENTIAL=$(curl --insecure -s -X POST https://keycloak.demo-portal.eu/realms/test-realm/protocol/oid4vc/credential \
--header 'Accept: */*' \
--header 'Content-Type: application/json' \
--header "Authorization: Bearer ${CREDENTIAL_ACCESS_TOKEN}" \
--data '{"credential_identifier":"natural-person", "format":"jwt_vc"}' | jq '.credential' -r); echo ${VERIFIABLE_CREDENTIAL}
Measured results
The criteria used to measure the results was the one specified by the Data Product Publication ISO25010 Quality file regarding Functional Suitability.
| Criterion | Description | Score (0-4) | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Completeness | Technical requirements cover all the specified tasks and user objectives. | 4 | The Fiware connector fully supports the participant onboarding process, covering all necessary steps for registering an organization as a trusted participant, including issuing and validating Verifiable Credentials (VCs). This ensures a comprehensive onboarding process. |
| Functional Correctness | Technical requirements meet results with the needed degree of precision. | 3 | While the onboarding process is generally accurate, there may be some areas where precision could be improved, particularly in handling edge cases or specific configurations. However, the core functionalities perform as expected. |
| Functional Appropriateness | Technical requirements facilitate the accomplishment of specified tasks and objectives. | 3 | The process is appropriate for the task, enabling organizations to onboard effectively. However, some steps could be streamlined to enhance efficiency, such as reducing the complexity of commands or improving the integration with identity providers. |
Overall Calculation: (4+3+3)/3 = 3.33
Functional Suitability Quality Metric Score: 3.33
Notes
The results for Test 1.2.1.1 for protoEMDS Final Stack (EDC-based) were extracted from this page in the GitHub repository.
This file was last modified at 2026-06-24 15:37:50 UTC.
Environment
This section identifies the technical context in which the protoEMDS Final Stack assessment is performed.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Assessment context | Integration phase assessment of the EMDS final technical infrastructure |
| Result perspective | protoemds_final_stack |
| Stack under assessment | protoEMDS Final Stack (EDC-based) |
| KPI1 area | Participant onboarding / identity |
| Existing test ID | 1.2.1.1 |
| Level | UC + Technical |
| ISO/IEC 25010 mapping | Functional suitability, Security |
| Owner (tentative) | Alessio (Cefriel) / Delia M. (NTT DATA) |
| Reviewer | Alessio |
| Deployment model assessed | TBD |
| Target environment | TBD |
| EDC version / release | TBD |
| Connector deployment reference | TBD |
| Assessment evidence | TBD |
The assessment should be completed using the deployment model for which evidence is realistically available. It is not mandatory to execute the same test in both CaaS and on-premise environments.
If only one deployment model is assessed, the other one should be marked as Not assessed.
Tested quality metric and method
This result reuses the existing stack-agnostic test definition in test.md and adds an protoEMDS Final Stack integration-assessment perspective.
It does not replace the historical stack-specific result files, such as result_edc_vc.md or result_fiware.md.
The quality metric, expected output and comparative criteria remain those defined by the original test. This result file should only capture the evidence and assessment outcome for the selected protoEMDS Final Stack deployment.
Test-specific assessment scope
If an onboarding online facility is provided, evaluate the level of customisation required to input participants’ metadata.
Expected Output
The expected output of this test is to evaluate the level of customization required to input participants' metadata if an onboarding online facility is provided.
Results
Assessment
Pending.
The assessment should be completed once consolidated technical evidence is available for the protoEMDS Final Stack deployment.
The result should clearly indicate which deployment model was assessed. It is acceptable to assess only one deployment model if evidence for the other deployment model is not available.
Deployment model assessed
| Deployment model | Status | Evidence | Consolidated assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaaS / IONOS-managed deployment | TBD | TBD | Complete this row only if evidence is collected from the IONOS-managed deployment. Otherwise mark as Not assessed. |
| On-premise deployment | TBD | TBD | Complete this row only if evidence is collected from an on-premise or locally managed deployment. Otherwise mark as Not assessed. |
Measured results
| Criterion | Description | Score (0-4) | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Completeness | TBD | TBD | TBD |
| Functional Correctness | TBD | TBD | TBD |
| Functional Appropriateness | TBD | TBD | TBD |
For more details, refer to the [IdentityHub API documentation](https: TBD Overall Calculation: TBD Functional Suitability Quality Metric Score: TBD
Notes
This result introduces an protoEMDS Final Stack perspective for the existing test 1.2.1.1 under the KPI1 area Participant onboarding / identity.
This result should not be interpreted as part of the original Phase 1 / Phase 2 stack-comparison campaign. It is intended as an integration phase assessment of the current EMDS final technical infrastructure.
The assessment should be completed using consolidated technical evidence, such as endpoint responses, logs, screenshots, Postman/curl executions, GitHub issues, pull requests, repository references, deployment status or confirmation from the relevant component owner.
This result file was generated from the local test.md and, where available, the local result_edc_vc.md structure. EDC+VC-specific evidence, values and scores were intentionally not reused.
The results for Test 1.2.1.1 for EDC+VC were extracted from this page in the GitHub repository.
This file was last modified at 2026-06-24 15:37:50 UTC.
Environment
- The test is carried in the IONOS environment as documented in the edc_mvd_deployment.md
- The test uses the EDC MVD commit [84f3c5f7] (https://github.com/eclipse-edc/MinimumViableDataspace/commit/84f3c5f70b4eea94de7ebee83da377e62fc759fd)
Tested quality metric and method
The quality metric for this test is based on the criteria outlined in iso27001_kpis_subkpis.xlsx. In Phase 1, the focus is on the Functional Suitability metric. For detailed information, please refer to the Comparative criteria (checklists, ...) section in the test description.
Expected output
The expected output of this test is to evaluate the level of customization required to input participants' metadata if an onboarding online facility is provided.
Results
Assessment
Onboarding Online Facility Scope
The scope of the onboarding online facility is detailed in the EDC MVD commit 84f3c5f7, which includes:
- EDC Connector
- Identity Hub (EDC component)
Evaluation of MVD Commit [84f3c5f7] (https://github.com/eclipse-edc/MinimumViableDataspace/commit/84f3c5f70b4eea94de7ebee83da377e62fc759fd).
The MVD participates in the onboarding procedure as outlined in the MVD version tag: 84f3c5f7.
-
The MVD uses an extension to mount the pre-configured verifiable credentials to the Identity Hub with the configurable key
edc.mvd.credentials.path: Link. The mounting action is provided by this extension. -
Managing the access key of the protected API of the Identity Hub is achieved by provisioning a
super userwith this extension:IdentityHub's Identity API does not provide a feature for participant self-registration, as it is not an end-user-facing API. This is intentional. New participant contexts must be created by the super-user.
For more details, refer to the IdentityHub API documentation.
-
The Identity Hub does not currently provide an API for storing verifiable credentials issued by an issuer: Storage API documentation (tag: 2de93ac6add4b34d499eb210471d4e0590f5d0c3).
Evaluation of Identity hub commit 572a6b0
Identithy hub provides following APIs
identity-apicontains the functions for CRUD on theVerifiable Credentials,Key Pairs,DID, andParticipant Context.ih-resolution-apicontains VC presentation/v1/participants/{participantId}/presentations/query
Measured results
The MVD test link demonstrates onboarding a new participant to the Dataspace system. However, the entire onboarding process is not fully implemented in the EDC system and is not user-friendly for non-technical users. The DID resolver must be implemented to resolve the participant's DID, which depends on the specific DID method used. Besides that, the VC insurance flow is currently missing in the Identity hub.
Is the feature available out of the box in EDC+VC (without the need for development)? No, plugin adoption is required. Given a development effort, is it possible to implement to the fullest extent of the spec? Yes, but the DID resolver is context-specific.
Based on the criteria outlined in the Comparative criteria (checklists, ...) section of the test description, the test is assigned the following score:
| Criterion | Description | Score (0-4) | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Functional Completeness | Technical requirements cover all the specified tasks and user objectives. | 2 | The EDC solution only partially covers the Verifiable Credential (VC) flow, with the issuance process entirely missing. |
| Functional Correctness | Technical requirements meet results with the needed degree of precision. | 3 | While the existing features of the EDC solution are generally accurate, the resolver requires domain-specific customization, which may affect precision in certain contexts. |
| Functional Appropriateness | Technical requirements facilitate the accomplishment of specified tasks and objectives. | 2 | The EDC solution requires significant customization and development work, particularly for the resolver, to fully support the required tasks and objectives within the domain context. |
Overall Calculation: (2+3+2)/3 = 2.33 Functional Suitability Quality Metric Score: 2.33
Notes
EDC is a pluggable ecosystem primarily targeting Java/Kotlin developers. Some extensions are available on the market for plug-and-play, but for certain specific use cases, developers need to write their own extensions.