NOOTS and EUDI Wallet: Digital Credentials as a Software Project

Citizens often have to prove information to the state that already exists elsewhere in its systems. Through Deutschland, was geht?, we want to explore a different flow: consider existing data first, ask only for what is missing, and make decisions understandable. Jana publicly announced our participation in the prototype program backed by SPRIND and BMDS.

A Prototype Initiative, Not Production Government Infrastructure

The announced approach identifies NOOTS for evidence retrieval and EUDI Wallet for digital proofs as possible building blocks. That is a development direction, not evidence of an existing production integration. Available interfaces, what can actually be tested, and applicable legal requirements need to be established for each procedure. Technical connectivity does not create legal authority to access a register.

Evidence Retrieval and Wallets Have Different Jobs

NOOTS and EUDI Wallet are not interchangeable. NOOTS is considered here for retrieving existing evidence; the wallet concerns, among other things, users presenting digital identity data or attributes. The application still needs to model the business context, required information, and procedural rules. A valid credential is not a complete decision about eligibility.

What an EUDI Integration Means for the Application

Germany's official Ecosystem Knowledge Center distinguishes Person Identification Data (PID) and Electronic Attestations of Attributes (EAA). Depending on their role, organizations can issue credentials or verify them as a relying party. Integration therefore begins with a concrete use case: which information is needed, who may issue it, and what action may follow from it?

The Interesting Questions Are Between the Building Blocks

• Which data is necessary, and which information must not be collected or logged?
• How does the application handle missing, stale, or conflicting information?
• Which trust requirements and validity checks apply to the particular credential?
• How can provenance, business rules, and outcomes be explained without unnecessarily exposing sensitive content?
• When does a person need to review, correct, or decide?

Understandable Decisions Need Explicit Rules

Identification, credential verification, and a decision about entitlement are separate steps. A language model must not blur that distinction. When AI supports an application, its role needs to be clear: explaining, preparing data, or requesting a bounded action. Authorization for that action, both technical and procedural, remains the responsibility of the system and the accountable people.

Building in Public Means Showing Limits Too

Jana's announcement commits to sharing progress and difficulties publicly. We want future articles to follow that approach: concrete integration steps, open assumptions, and traceable tests rather than a success story written in advance. Sandbox testing is not production operation or certification. This article describes motivation and design questions, not a completed integration report.

Technical Starting Points

The current German developer guide and the European Architecture and Reference Framework are important starting points for implementation. Protocol profiles and rollout status continue to evolve; an integration needs to identify the versions and checks it actually uses.