feat: Add support for JWT VC Issuer Metadata by GianfrancoMS · Pull Request #2456 · openwallet-foundation/credo-ts

GianfrancoMS · 2025-10-15T20:43:24Z

Add support for JWT VC Issuer Metadata
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-oauth-sd-jwt-vc-03.html#name-jwt-vc-issuer-metadata

changeset-bot · 2025-10-15T20:43:28Z

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: ca39304

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 19 packages

Name	Type
@credo-ts/core	Patch
@credo-ts/drizzle-storage	Patch
@credo-ts/openid4vc	Patch
@credo-ts/action-menu	Patch
@credo-ts/anoncreds	Patch
@credo-ts/askar-to-drizzle-storage-migration	Patch
@credo-ts/askar	Patch
@credo-ts/cheqd	Patch
@credo-ts/didcomm	Patch
@credo-ts/drpc	Patch
@credo-ts/hedera	Patch
@credo-ts/indy-sdk-to-askar-migration	Patch
@credo-ts/indy-vdr	Patch
@credo-ts/node	Patch
@credo-ts/question-answer	Patch
@credo-ts/react-native	Patch
@credo-ts/redis-cache	Patch
@credo-ts/tenants	Patch
@credo-ts/webvh	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

TimoGlastra · 2025-10-16T17:28:13Z

+      return {
+        method: 'jwk',
+        jwk: result.jwk,
+        issuer: result.issuer,
+      }


I'm thinking whether we want to call the method something else than jwk. Since with JWK we really only verify the binding that the credential is issued by a JWK, but with the jwt vc issuer metadata, you also verify the domain of the issuer where the issuer metadata is hosted.

Should we thus call this maybe well-known-issuer-metadata or well-known-issuer? I'm open to other names, if we can come up with something simple that does capture the origin of the key (like with x5c and did)

I decided to go with jwt-vc-issuer-metadata

TimoGlastra · 2025-10-16T17:32:31Z

    const operation = { operation: 'verify', algorithm: options.algorithm } as const
    const kms =
-      backend || typeof options.key !== 'string'
+      backend || typeof options.key.keyId !== 'string'


Ah thanks for cathing this 👍

TimoGlastra · 2025-10-16T17:35:55Z

+export const JwksSchema = z.object({
+  keys: z.array(vJwk),
+})
+
+export const SdJwtVcIssuerMetadataSchema = z.union([
+  z.object({
+    issuer: z.string().url(),
+    jwks_uri: z.string().url(),
+    jwks: z.never().optional(),
+  }),
+  z.object({
+    issuer: z.string().url(),
+    jwks_uri: z.never().optional(),
+    jwks: JwksSchema,
+  }),
+])


It probably makes sense to also move to zod gradually for other modules, but are these validation schemas also used somewhere? Or are they just used for types? I think it would be good to use this in resolveSigningPublicJwkFromJwtVcIssuerMetadata.

You can use the zParseWithErrorHandling util method on the returned JSON payload.

They are used at resolveSigningPublicJwkFromJwtVcIssuerMetadata

They just use the types as a generic to the fetch method, but they are not actually used for validation. So we don't get runtime validation, only build time validation, and we cas the .json() to the provided type.

TimoGlastra · 2025-10-16T17:44:45Z

    // Configure endpoints
    configureIssuerMetadataEndpoint(endpointRouter)
    configureJwksEndpoint(endpointRouter, this.config)
+    configureJwtVcIssuerMetadataEndpoint(endpointRouter)


While i understand to add it to the openid4vc router, it does tightly couple the credential format with the issuance protocol. We could add this to the openid4vc module, so it could just register some additional routes, but we would need a new record type for it in that case, and now we can just use the openid4vc issuer record.

I think for this is fine, and we can always make it more flexible later on 👍

Hmm after thinking about this a bit more, I'm not so sure, since it would mean the jwt-vc-issuer would use the same url as the openid4vc-issuer. I'd expect you'd more often use an url like example.com over example.com/oid4vci/<uuid> as the value for iss.

Wouldn't it make more sense to just host the issuer metadata separately for now? We have the same for did:web, where you can create the did document in Credo, but you need to host it yourself on your webserver on the well konwn path

I think we can support both use cases where we can host our own endpoint and have issuers host on their own servers.

Isn't this the same thing for the other well-known endpoints?
We host oauth and openid well-known endpoints.
It's the same logic here.

what if someone wants to issue a jwt vc over didcomm?

We host oauth and openid well-known endpoints.

oauth and openid well-known endpoints are inherently tied to openid4vci. You can issue a credenetial over oid4vci without these metadata files. For jwt-vc-issuer metadata it's different. There's no inherent relation between the two, except that you can choose to issue an SD-JWT VC credential over openid4vci (but as @rmlearney-digicatapult, it could theoretically also be done over DIDComm for example)

TimoGlastra · 2025-10-16T17:54:15Z

+import type { OpenId4VcIssuanceRequest } from './requestContext'
+
+export function configureJwtVcIssuerMetadataEndpoint(router: Router) {
+  router.get('/.well-known/jwt-vc-issuer', async (_request: OpenId4VcIssuanceRequest, response: Response, next) => {


This won't be hosted at the correct path looking at the spec. It will be hosted at <url>/oid4vci/<uuid>/.well-known/jwt-vc-issuer, while it should be hosted at <url>/.well-known/jwt-vc-issuer/oid4vci/<uuid>

We have this issue for other documents as well: #2221

Yes, it's the same issue for other documents, but I think we should leave it here until we figure out how to host all the documents correctly.
Plus, I've added support for both URLs.

TimoGlastra

Hi @GianfrancoMS, thanks a lot for this PR! It's a great addition.

I'm thinking whether we should get the support into sd-jwt-vc merged, and hold off on the oid4vci integration and just require it to be hosted separately for now. It's quite easy to add this, and I'm not convinced yet that we should bind this to the oid4vci record yet. Currently the issuance method (did/x5c) is separate from the oid4vci protocol.

GianfrancoMS · 2025-10-16T18:39:37Z

@TimoGlastra I tried to generate the migrations for drizzle, but got an error, so I'm not including those migrations in this PR. Hopefully you can help me with that 🙏

Signed-off-by: gianfrancoms <gianfrancomonsal@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Timo Glastra <timo@animo.id>

GianfrancoMS · 2025-10-28T02:46:28Z

@TimoGlastra I removed the oid4vci integration.
Please, let's try to merge the support into sd-jwt-vc merged.

GianfrancoMS · 2025-10-29T04:36:34Z

@TimoGlastra Let me know if you need anything else from my side to get this merged.

GianfrancoMS requested a review from a team as a code owner October 15, 2025 20:43

GianfrancoMS changed the title ~~Add support JWT VC Issuer Metadata~~ feat: Add support JWT VC Issuer Metadata Oct 15, 2025

GianfrancoMS changed the title ~~feat: Add support JWT VC Issuer Metadata~~ feat: Add support for JWT VC Issuer Metadata Oct 15, 2025

GianfrancoMS force-pushed the sd-jwt-vc-issuer-metadata branch 2 times, most recently from b52fd78 to 4b523bd Compare October 15, 2025 20:52

GianfrancoMS closed this Oct 15, 2025

GianfrancoMS reopened this Oct 16, 2025

TimoGlastra reviewed Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread packages/core/src/modules/sd-jwt-vc/SdJwtVcOptions.ts Outdated

TimoGlastra reviewed Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread packages/core/src/modules/sd-jwt-vc/SdJwtVcOptions.ts Outdated

TimoGlastra reviewed Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread packages/core/src/modules/sd-jwt-vc/utils.ts Outdated

TimoGlastra reviewed Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

GianfrancoMS mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2025

kid not included in the JWT's header. openwallet-foundation-labs/oid4vc-ts#103

Open

GianfrancoMS requested a review from TimoGlastra October 16, 2025 18:40

GianfrancoMS force-pushed the sd-jwt-vc-issuer-metadata branch from 42bef4d to 11a773a Compare October 17, 2025 17:20

GianfrancoMS and others added 2 commits October 27, 2025 21:43

Support for JWT VC Issuer Metadata

64c7fd7

Signed-off-by: gianfrancoms <gianfrancomonsal@gmail.com>

Create young-cycles-burn.md

ca39304

Signed-off-by: Timo Glastra <timo@animo.id>

GianfrancoMS force-pushed the sd-jwt-vc-issuer-metadata branch from 11a773a to ca39304 Compare October 28, 2025 02:43

GianfrancoMS requested a review from rmlearney-digicatapult October 29, 2025 04:35

TimoGlastra mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

Support for JWT VC Issuer Metadata #2448

Open

Conversation

GianfrancoMS commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

changeset-bot bot commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🦋 Changeset detected

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TimoGlastra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS commented Oct 16, 2025

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

GianfrancoMS commented Oct 29, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

GianfrancoMS commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

changeset-bot bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

GianfrancoMS Oct 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading