Decision Framework for Verifiable Credentials
When governments come to us with questions about Verifiable Credentials, they rarely start with technology. They start with a problem — a border crossing that needs to work offline, an agricultural export certificate that takes weeks to verify, a health credential that must protect patient privacy across jurisdictions.
This framework answers the questions our operations team hears most often from countries implementing digital public infrastructure:
Which standard fits my use case?
Which open-source DPG platform do you recommend?
How do these systems interoperate across countries?
We mapped 12 real-world use cases — from national ID and education to agriculture traceability, and tourism against the six dominant VC standards and four Digital Public Good platforms:
INJI, CREDEBL, walt.id, and QuarkID.
Resources
🗂️ Standards by Use Case
An interactive reference covering all 13 use cases. Each card shows the recommended standards, the reasoning behind them, and the key technical and regulatory requirements — with indicators for privacy, interoperability, adoption maturity, and offline capability.
📊 VC Stack Comparison
A detailed technical comparison of INJI, CREDEBL, walt.id, and QuarkID across standards support, credential formats, revocation, offline verification, DID methods, and interoperability.
📄 Decision Cheatsheet
A single-page printable reference. Includes the full DPG × Use Case matrix, the six standards at a glance, critical interoperability gaps, and a quick-guide for platform selection.
Last updated
Was this helpful?