Onboarding Process
This section describes the Onboarding Process within APTITUDE, where it is realised as the mocked-up version of the WRP Registration Process and Notification Process (defined in Trust Architecture) through which entities become operational and recognisable in the common trust infrastructure of the pilot.
Onboarding collects all the information needed to make entities operational and recognisable, and it replaces the administrative and regulatory processes that, outside the pilot, manage the registration, notification and publication of Trusted Entities between Member States and the European Commission.
Within the pilot, the boundary is as follows:
- The implemented elements are the creation of the registration records, the issuance of the certificates, and the signing and publication of the trusted lists, because these are what trust evaluation is tested against.
- The mocked elements are the notification act between a Member State and the European Commission, the publication in the OJEU, and the identity proofing of entities.
Note
The certification of technical products such as a Wallet Solution is out of scope of the pilot: it is an external process, and only its outcome is referenced. The data schemas, certificate profiles, trusted-list formats, and low-level protocols are instead out of scope of this section only: they are normatively defined in the referenced sections of this specification and are only pointed to from here.
This boundary is mapped onto the components of the Onboarding System in the summary table at the end of Onboarding System.
Note
Requirements specific to the APTITUDE pilot are identified inline with the prefix [ONBOARD-...] and consolidated in Onboarding Requirements. Obligations defined in other sections of this specification, or in the normative baseline, are referenced where they apply, keeping their own identifiers.
The APTITUDE Onboarding System SHALL implement the Onboarding Process defined in this section [ONBOARD-GEN-01].
Overview¶
The entities involved in onboarding fall into two categories, and this distinction underpins the whole process:
- Trust infrastructure entities (in short, infrastructure entities) are the entities that operate the trust infrastructure through which onboarding is performed, namely registration (the Registrar, operating the Register), certificate issuance (the Provider of WRPAC and the Provider of WRPRC), and publication of the trusted lists (the LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider). The LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider has a special role, as its own Trust Anchor is the root against which the lists are validated.
- Operational entities are the entities that are onboarded through that infrastructure in order to become operational and recognisable in the ecosystem, namely the WRP and the Wallet Provider.
The onboarding process presupposes the existence of a functional trust infrastructure. Its one-time setup is a prerequisite that must be satisfied before any operational entity can be onboarded; it is described in Trust Infrastructure Prerequisites. The recurring process through which operational entities become active is described in Operational Entity Onboarding.
graph LR
subgraph OB["Onboarding Process"]
direction LR
subgraph PRE["Trust Infrastructure Prerequisites (one-time)"]
direction TB
S1["Establish the trust infrastructure entities\nthat operate the Onboarding System"]
end
subgraph ONB["Operational Entity Onboarding (recurring)"]
direction TB
O1["Onboard the operational entities"]
end
PRE ==>|"enables"| ONB
end
%% Style
style OB fill:#ffff,stroke:#abb2bf,stroke-width:2px,rx:20,ry:20
style PRE fill:#ffff,stroke:#2f4f4f,stroke-width:2px,rx:20,ry:20
style ONB fill:#ffff,stroke:#ffdab9,stroke-width:2px,rx:20,ry:20
classDef green fill:#8fbc8f,stroke:#2f4f4f
classDef cand fill:#ffefd5,stroke:#ffdab9
class S1 green;
class O1 cand;
Trust Infrastructure Prerequisites¶
The Onboarding System operates on top of a trust infrastructure whose entities must be established and have their trust anchors published before any operational entity can be onboarded. This setup is a one-time prerequisite and is not part of the recurring onboarding flow; operational entity onboarding SHALL NOT start before it is in place [ONBOARD-GEN-02].
Within APTITUDE, the trust infrastructure prerequisites SHALL be established out of band and require no pilot software [ONBOARD-PRE-01]. The trust anchors of the infrastructure entities are provided and shared among the participants as a one-time operational setup. What is implemented and testable is the result, i.e. the signed, published trusted lists against which trust is later evaluated (see Trust Anchor Validation Process). The operations below describe the trust infrastructure setup process.
graph LR
OJEU(["Mocked OJEU root<br/>(LoTE/TL Provider self-signed root certificate)"])
subgraph LoTEs["Infrastructure LoTE"]
L1[("LoTE with Registrars TA")]
L2[("LoTE with Providers of WRPAC TA")]
L3[("LoTE with Providers of WRPRC TA")]
end
DP[/"LoTE / Trusted List distribution point"/]
OJEU -->|"signs / seals"| L1
OJEU -->|"signs / seals"| L2
OJEU -->|"signs / seals"| L3
L1 -->|"published at"| DP
L2 -->|"published at"| DP
L3 -->|"published at"| DP
%% Style
style LoTEs fill:#ffff,stroke:#abb2bf,stroke-width:2px,rx:20,ry:20
classDef list fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#abb2bf
classDef dp fill:#f5f5f5,stroke:#999
classDef root fill:#fde9d9,stroke:#d9a441
class L1,L2,L3 list;
class OJEU root;
class DP dp;
The setup comprises the following operations:
- Key and Certificate Provisioning. Each trust infrastructure entity provides its signing key and certificate. Within APTITUDE, the trust infrastructure signing entities SHALL use self-signed root certificates, with no higher certification authority [ONBOARD-PRE-02]. Trust is conferred by the publication of the trust anchor in the relevant LoTE.
- List Trust Anchor. The self-signed root of the LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider is the trust anchor used to validate the lists. In the normative framework this anchor is the certificate published in the OJEU; within APTITUDE, the OJEU publication is mocked and the certificate is self-signed. The distribution point where this trust anchor is made available to the APTITUDE participants is an operational matter, out of scope of this document.
- Notification of Trust Anchors. The Trust Anchor of each infrastructure entity is listed in its corresponding LoTE (the Registrars LoTE, the Providers of WRPAC LoTE, or the Providers of WRPRC LoTE).
- Signing and Publication. The LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider signs/seals the LoTE and publishes them at a distribution point referenced by the mocked OJEU/LOTL, so that they can be retrieved at validation time (see Trust Anchor Validation Process).
The same LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider also signs the lists populated during operational entity onboarding (the PID Providers, PuB-EAA Providers, and Wallet Providers LoTE, and the EUMS TL referenced by the LOTL).
Operational Entity Onboarding¶
This section describes the recurring process through which operational entities become active in the ecosystem, once the Trust Infrastructure Prerequisites are in place (ONBOARD-GEN-02).
Onboarding System¶
This subsection describes the logical components that implement the Onboarding Process in APTITUDE and how they relate. It is an APTITUDE-specific logical view as the roles are normatively defined, but their decomposition into components is a pilot design choice and is not defined by the EUDI Wallet normative framework. Technical implementation details (technologies, protocols, deployment) are out of scope of this document. The diagram below shows how the operational entity requesting onboarding interacts with these components.
graph TB
OpEn(["Operational Entity (requesting onboarding)"])
subgraph SYS["APTITUDE Onboarding System - components"]
direction LR
UI["Onboarding UI"]
RegSvc["Registration Service<br/>verification, record and status management (+ REST API)"]
WRPReg[("WRP Register<br/>CIR 2025/848 records")]
ACsvc["WRPAC Issuance Service<br/>issue / revoke WRPAC"]
RCsvc["WRPRC Issuance Service<br/>issue / revoke WRPRC"]
PubSvc["Publication Service<br/>(mocked EC / MS-TLP)<br/>consolidate and publish"]
NotifDS[("Notification dataset<br/>CIR 2024/2980 notifiable info")]
Lists[("Trusted Lists<br/>LoTE / LOTL / EUMS TL")]
UI -->|"create / check / update registration"| RegSvc
UI -->|"request WRPAC"| ACsvc
UI -.->|"request WRPRC (where applicable)"| RCsvc
UI -->|"submit notifiable data"| PubSvc
RegSvc -->|"CRUD operations"| WRPReg
ACsvc -->|"status and data for verification"| RegSvc
RCsvc -->|"status and data for verification"| RegSvc
RCsvc -.->|"check WRPAC validity (when relevant)"| ACsvc
RCsvc ~~~ PubSvc
PubSvc -->|"manage notifiable data"| NotifDS
PubSvc -->|"publish / set entry status"| Lists
end
OpEn <-->|"submit data, receive the resulting artifacts and check status"| UI
%% Style
style SYS fill:#ffff,stroke:#2f4f4f,stroke-width:2px,rx:20,ry:20
classDef green fill:#8fbc8f,stroke:#2f4f4f
classDef blue fill:#e8f0fe,stroke:#abb2bf
classDef cand fill:#ffefd5,stroke:#ffdab9
classDef ui fill:#d5e8d4,stroke:#2f4f4f
class RegSvc,ACsvc,RCsvc,WRPReg green;
class PubSvc,NotifDS,Lists blue;
class OpEn cand;
class UI ui;
The components, and the role each realises, are:
- Onboarding UI (APTITUDE-specific orchestrator). It is the single point of contact of the entities requesting onboarding and coordinates the other services. It collects the data submitted by the entity, and it SHALL trigger, in order, registration, certificate issuance, and, where applicable, publication or update of the trusted-list entry [ONBOARD-GEN-03].
- Registration Service. It implements the Registrar role, handling verification and the management of the registration record and its status. It exposes the common REST API (see Common Register API).
- WRP Register. It is the Register defined by [CIR 2025/848], which stores the registration records.
- WRPAC Issuance Service and WRPRC Issuance Service. They realise the Provider of WRPAC and the Provider of WRPRC.
- Publication Service. It realises the LoTE Provider / Trusted List Provider that signs and publishes the trusted lists. Within APTITUDE it mocks the EC LoTE Provider and the Member State Trusted List Provider (see Trust Architecture), which can be played by the same subject.
Note
Within the pilot, the Onboarding UI is an abstract orchestrator, and it could be implemented as a structured intake (for example a web form or a portal) that drives the services, and the specific user interface is an implementation matter.
The Onboarding System SHALL keep the WRP Register and the Notification dataset as two distinct data stores [ONBOARD-GEN-04], because the data needed for notification does not fully coincide with the data that populates the WRP Register:
- the WRP Register holds the WRP registration records ([CIR 2025/848]), namely identification, intended use, and related data, as defined in Register Data Schema;
- the Notification dataset holds the notifiable information related to the notifiable entity ([CIR 2024/2980]), namely identification, trust anchors, and service supply points, whose fields are defined as LoTE entries in List of Trusted Entities.
The datasets above overlap only in part (identification), and the infrastructure entities that are notified but not registered as WRPs (Wallet Providers, Providers of WRPAC/WRPRC, Registrars) are not present in the WRP Register at all.
Against this decomposition, the pilot boundary set out in the introduction of the Onboarding Process section is summarised below.
| Element | In the pilot |
|---|---|
| Onboarding UI, Registration Service (with the WRP Register and its API), WRPAC and WRPRC Issuance Services, Publication Service (with the trusted lists) | implemented as pilot software |
| Trust infrastructure setup (prerequisites) | performed out of band; no pilot software |
| The Member State to European Commission notification act, and the OJEU publication | mocked, respectively by the Publication Service and by the pilot |
| The certification of a Wallet Solution | external; out of scope of the pilot and only referenced |
| Data schemas, certificate profiles, trusted-list formats, low-level protocols | defined in the referenced sections of this specification, not redefined here |
Input¶
The required inputs to onboard an operational entity depend on its type and on the onboarding path it follows (see Onboarding Paths by Entity Type). The following inputs SHALL be required:
- Registration data of entities that are registered in the Register, i.e., all WRP types. This data conforms to the
WalletRelyingPartyschema defined in Register Data Schema, which transposes the [CIR 2025/848, Annex I] and [CIR 2025/848-Amendment, Annex VI] set. - Notifiable data of entities published in a trusted list, i.e., PID Provider, PuB-EAA Provider, QEAA Provider, non-qualified EAA Provider, and the Wallet Provider. This data covers the identification, Trust Anchors, and service supply points needed for the relevant trusted-list entry, as defined in List of Trusted Entities.
- Cryptographic material, namely the public key(s) for which a WRP requests a WRPAC, generated according to [ETSI TS 119 411-8], and the public keys of the signature or seal certificates the entity uses to sign or seal its artifacts.
Note
A WRP that is also a notified entity (PID, PuB-EAA, QEAA, or non-qualified EAA Provider) provides both the registration data and the notifiable data: the former populates the Register and drives the WRPAC, the latter populates the corresponding trusted list. A Relying Party or a Relying Party Intermediary provides only the registration data, as it requires no trusted-list entry.
Output¶
A successful onboarding produces the artifacts below, whose data model and format are normatively specified in the referenced sections:
- the Register entry and its publication, see Register Data Schema and Common Register API;
- the WRPAC, see Wallet-Relying Party Access Certificate;
- the WRPRC, see Wallet-Relying Party Registration Certificate;
- the trusted-list entry (LoTE, EUMS TL, or the trusted list for non-qualified EAA Providers), produced by the Notification and Publication step.
Onboarding Paths by Entity Type¶
Each entity type follows a different path and produces a different set of outputs, summarised in the table below.
| Entity type | Register record | WRPAC | WRPRC | Trusted-list entry |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PID Provider | yes | yes | where applicable | PID Providers LoTE |
| QEAA Provider | yes | yes | where applicable | EUMS TL (referenced in the LOTL) |
| PuB-EAA Provider | yes | yes | where applicable | PuB-EAA Providers LoTE |
| Non-qualified EAA Provider | yes | yes | where applicable | Trusted List referenced by the Rulebook (APTITUDE-specific) |
| Relying Party | yes | yes | where applicable | none |
| Relying Party Intermediary | yes | yes | where applicable | none |
| Wallet Provider | no | no | no | Wallet Providers LoTE |
The steps below describe the onboarding journey: any WRP entity type goes through Data Collection and Registration Record Creation, Certificate Issuance and, where it is also a notified entity, Notification and Publication; the Wallet Provider goes through that last step only.
Data Collection and Registration Record Creation¶
This step produces the registration record for a WRP.
The entity submits its registration data through the Onboarding UI, which forwards the request to the Registration Service (Registrar).
Within APTITUDE, registration SHALL be restricted to APTITUDE participants, and the Onboarding System SHALL enforce this restriction [ONBOARD-REG-01]. This replaces the identity proofing of [ETSI TS 119 461] and the verification duties of [CIR 2025/848, Article 6] (REGISTRAR-REG-04 to REGISTRAR-REG-07, not restated here). The mechanism by which participation is established, for example a pre-provisioned list of participants, or a membership check, is an implementation choice; a non-participant SHALL NOT be registered, and onboarding does not proceed.
On successful verification, the Registrar SHALL create the record through the common Register write API (POST /wrp, see Common Register API), using a body conforming to the WalletRelyingParty schema of Register Data Schema, and SHALL set the registration status to active. Write access to the API SHALL be authenticated and restricted to the Registrar [ONBOARD-REG-02]; the concrete credential mechanism (for example a bearer token or mutual TLS) is an implementation choice. When published or queried, the record is electronically signed/sealed by or on behalf of the Registrar (REGISTER-PUB-05).
Certificate Issuance¶
This step issues the certificates for a WRP, once its registration record is active.
The request/issuance protocol is an implementation choice (for example ACME, EST, or a manual exchange); the enrolment SHOULD include a proof of possession of the private key corresponding to the certified public key, a property inherited from the certificate-policy framework underlying [ETSI TS 119 411-8]. The verifications below apply regardless of the protocol.
- WRPAC. The Provider of WRPAC issues one or more WRPACs, whose content and format are defined in Wallet-Relying Party Access Certificate. A Relying Party receives a separate WRPAC for each of its Relying Party Instances (
Reg_10a). At issuance time it SHALL verify that the WRP has an active registration status and that the certificate information is consistent with the Register (requirementPROVIDER-WRPAC-01in Register, from [CIR 2025/848, Annex IV 3(c)]); its attributes are derived from the Register information ([ETSI TS 119 475, clause 5.1.2]). If the registration is not active or the data are inconsistent, the Provider SHALL refuse to issue the certificate. - WRPRC (where mandated by [CIR 2025/848, Article 8]). The Provider of WRPRC issues a WRPRC, whose content and format are defined in Wallet-Relying Party Registration Certificate. At issuance time it SHALL verify the Register status, the consistency with the Register information, and the validity of the corresponding WRPAC when relevant (requirement
PROVIDER-WRPRC-02in Register, from [CIR 2025/848, Annex V 3(c)]). The same failure handling applies.
Note
In the normative baseline, the WRPRC is created during the registration process by a Provider of WRPRC associated to the Registrar (RPRC_09, RPRC_13), and no certificate-based request step is described. The presentation of the WRPAC when requesting the WRPRC, shown in the Detailed flow, is therefore an APTITUDE-specific design choice, which gives the Provider of WRPRC direct evidence for the WRPAC validity verification required by PROVIDER-WRPRC-02.
Identity proofing is not repeated here; it is performed by the Registrar at Data Collection and Registration Record Creation. After issuance, the entity deploys each WRPAC at the Relying Party Instance for which it was issued (Reg_10a), provides its WRPRC to its Relying Party Instances or service supply points and, for an Attestation Provider, includes it in the Credential Issuer Metadata used at issuance (RPRC_10, RPRC_14, RPRC_22).
Notification and Publication¶
This step publishes a notified entity, together with the Trust Anchor of the technical component it operates, in the appropriate trusted list. Notification is a separate, Member State level process ([CIR 2024/2980]) and is not a duty of the Registrar. Within APTITUDE, the Member State to European Commission notification act SHALL be mocked by the Publication Service, triggered by the Onboarding UI, while the signing and publication of the trusted lists SHALL follow the normative framework [ONBOARD-PUB-01].
- a PID Provider or a PuB-EAA Provider is added, respectively, to the PID Providers LoTE or the PuB-EAA Providers LoTE;
- a QEAA Provider is published on the EUMS TL, whose URL is referenced in the List Of Trusted Lists (LOTL), under the eIDAS Trusted List framework;
- a non-qualified EAA Provider is not placed on any EU-level trusted list, because the EU framework leaves its trust-anchor distribution to the applicable Attestation Rulebook. For the purposes of the pilot, a non-qualified EAA Provider SHALL be published in a dedicated trusted list in the [ETSI TS 119 612] format, referenced by the applicable Attestation Rulebook and kept outside the List Of Trusted Lists (LOTL), with the Rulebook as its root of trust [ONBOARD-PUB-02]. This is an APTITUDE-specific simplification, and therefore the presence on this trusted list does not confer the regulatory vetting of the PID, QEAA, or PuB-EAA lists, as it is not the EUMS TL;
- the Wallet Provider follows a notification-only path, with no Register record and no WRPAC, and its Trust Anchor is published in the Wallet Providers LoTE;
- a Relying Party or a Relying Party Intermediary requires no trusted-list entry, as trust in it is anchored through the signed Register and its WRPAC.
Note
The Trust Anchor published for an Attestation Provider is the key with which its credential issuer (the service supply points) signs the Attestations; for a Wallet Provider it is the key signing the WUAs of its Wallet Solution. The trusted-list entry therefore binds the organisational entity to the technical component that operates at runtime.
On failure, if publication does not complete, the entity may be registered and hold a WRPAC but is not yet present in the trusted list, and is therefore not trusted by Relying Parties until the entry is published.
Detailed Flow¶
sequenceDiagram
participant E as Operational Entity
participant UI as Onboarding UI
participant RegServ as Registration Service
participant Register as WRP Register
participant ACServ as WRPAC Issuance Service
participant RCServ as WRPRC Issuance Service
participant PubServ as Publication Service
participant TL as LoTE / EUMS TL
E->>UI: submit onboarding data
alt entity registers (any WRP type)
UI->>RegServ: create registration (registration data + crypto material)
RegServ->>RegServ: ensure entity is an APTITUDE participant (mocked proofing)
RegServ<<->>Register: write data
RegServ-->>UI: response with status active
UI->>ACServ: request WRPAC
ACServ->>RegServ: request verification of active status and consistency
RegServ<<->>Register: get data
RegServ-->>ACServ: response with active status
ACServ->>ACServ: check data consistency
ACServ-->>UI: WRPAC
UI-->>E: provide WRPAC
opt WRPRC mandated
E->>UI: request WRPRC (with WRPAC)
UI->>RCServ: request WRPRC
RCServ->>RCServ: check WRPAC validity (when relevant)
RCServ->>RegServ: request verification of active status and consistency
RegServ<<->>Register: get data
RegServ-->>RCServ: response with active status
RCServ->>RCServ: check data consistency
RCServ-->>UI: WRPRC
UI-->>E: provide WRPRC
end
opt notifiable WRP (PID / PuB-EAA / QEAA / non-qualified EAA Providers)
UI->>PubServ: submit notifiable data
PubServ<<->>TL: publish to applicable trusted list
PubServ-->>UI: entry successfully created
UI-->>E: publication confirmed
end
else notification-only (Wallet Provider)
UI->>PubServ: submit notifiable data
PubServ<<->>TL: publish to Wallet Providers LoTE
PubServ-->>UI: entry successfully created
UI-->>E: publication confirmed
end
Connection to Lifecycle Management¶
Onboarding is the first phase of the lifecycle of an entity and of the artifacts produced for it. This subsection summarises how onboarding connects to the Trust Management Process and distinguishes the lifecycle of registered entities from that of notified entities.
For entities that are registered in the Register, the registration record follows the status model below.
stateDiagram-v2
[*] --> Active: onboarding completed
Active --> Active: update of registration data
Active --> Cancelled: cancellation
Cancelled --> [*]
- Update. A change to the registration data triggers the corresponding update of the dependent artifacts. The Provider of WRPAC and the Provider of WRPRC SHALL monitor the Register and reissue or revoke the affected WRPAC / WRPRC when the change requires it (requirements
PROVIDER-WRPAC-02andPROVIDER-WRPRC-03in Register), and the corresponding trusted list entry is updated where applicable. - Cancellation / De-onboarding. Setting the registration status to
cancelled(or deleting the record) triggers the revocation of any dependent WRPAC and WRPRC by the respective providers. The revocation mechanisms (CRL/OCSP for WRPACs and Status List Tokens for WRPRCs) are defined in Revocation Mechanisms.
These actions SHALL act on the organisational entity, that is its registration and the certificates issued to it, and not on the technical product it operates [ONBOARD-LC-02]. The certification lifecycle of the technical product, in particular the certification of a Wallet Solution, is a separate process, out of scope of this document. A change to that certification that does not affect the entity's eligibility SHALL be reflected as a notification update and SHALL NOT, by itself, be treated as de-onboarding. A change that makes the entity no longer eligible SHALL instead lead to its cancellation, whose effect on the trusted lists is defined by ONBOARD-LC-01 [ONBOARD-LC-03].
The lifecycle of entities that are only notified is governed by the notification framework ([CIR 2024/2980]). The entity is published when notified, and upon cancellation it stops being trusted (ARF GenNot_05). For the Wallet Provider, a cancellation additionally requires the revocation of all its valid WUAs (ARF WPNot_06). The same applies to the other notified entities published in their LoTEs (PID and PuB-EAA Providers, Providers of WRPAC and WRPRC, and Registrars); QEAA Providers follow the corresponding lifecycle on the EUMS TL under the eIDAS Trusted List framework.
How "stops being trusted" is represented depends on the list type, and APTITUDE adopts the representation already supported by each format. The PuB-EAA Provider LoTE and the EUMS TL carry an explicit per-entry status, which on cancellation SHALL be set to withdrawn or invalid; the PID Provider, Wallet Provider, Provider of WRPAC, Provider of WRPRC, and Registrar LoTEs carry no per-entry status (per [ETSI TS 119 602], ServiceStatus and the service history are not used for these types), so for them a cancelled entity SHALL be reflected by removing the entry [ONBOARD-LC-01]. The broader lifecycle of notified entities belongs to the Trust Management Process.
Finally, the artifacts produced by onboarding are consumed in the trust-evaluation processes. The WRPAC is used in the Authentication Process, the WRPRC and the Register in the Authorization Process, the trusted-list trust anchors in the Trust Anchor Validation Process, and the revocation of the certificates in Revocation Mechanisms.
Onboarding Requirements¶
Note
Those tables are provided for implementation and conformance-verification purposes. They consolidate the APTITUDE-specific requirements defined throughout this section. In case of interpretative ambiguity between those tables and the body of the section, the body of the section SHALL prevail. Obligations defined in other sections of this specification, or in the normative baseline, are referenced in the "Related external requirement" column and are not reproduced as APTITUDE requirements.
General¶
| ID | Requirement | Scope | Related external requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| ONBOARD-GEN-01 | The APTITUDE Onboarding System SHALL implement the Onboarding Process defined in this section. | Both | -- |
| ONBOARD-GEN-02 | Operational entity onboarding SHALL NOT start before the trust infrastructure prerequisites have been established. | Both | -- |
| ONBOARD-GEN-03 | The Onboarding UI SHALL trigger, in order, registration, certificate issuance, and, where applicable, publication or update of the trusted-list entry. | Onboarding | -- |
| ONBOARD-GEN-04 | The Onboarding System SHALL keep the WRP Register and the Notification dataset as two distinct data stores. | Both | -- |
Prerequisites¶
| ID | Requirement | Scope | Related external requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| ONBOARD-PRE-01 | Within APTITUDE, the trust infrastructure prerequisites SHALL be established out of band and require no pilot software. | Prerequisites | -- |
| ONBOARD-PRE-02 | Within APTITUDE, the trust infrastructure signing entities SHALL use self-signed root certificates, with no higher certification authority. | Prerequisites | -- |
Registration¶
| ID | Requirement | Scope | Related external requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| ONBOARD-REG-01 | Within APTITUDE, registration SHALL be restricted to APTITUDE participants; a non-participant SHALL NOT be registered. | Onboarding | [ETSI TS 119 461], [CIR 2025/848] Art. 6, REGISTRAR-REG-04 to REGISTRAR-REG-07 |
| ONBOARD-REG-02 | Write access to the Register API SHALL be authenticated and restricted to the Registrar. | Onboarding | -- |
Publication¶
| ID | Requirement | Scope | Related external requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| ONBOARD-PUB-01 | Within APTITUDE, the Member State to European Commission notification act SHALL be mocked by the Publication Service, while the signing and publication of the trusted lists SHALL follow the normative framework. | Onboarding | [CIR 2024/2980] |
| ONBOARD-PUB-02 | Within APTITUDE, a non-qualified EAA Provider SHALL be published in a trusted list in the [ETSI TS 119 612] format, referenced by the applicable Attestation Rulebook and kept outside the LOTL, with the Rulebook as its root of trust. | Onboarding | OIA_15, ISSU_10, ARB_26 |
Lifecycle¶
| ID | Requirement | Scope | Related external requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| ONBOARD-LC-01 | Trusted lists carrying a per-entry status SHALL reflect cancellation by setting the status to withdrawn or invalid; trusted lists carrying no per-entry status SHALL reflect it by removing the entry. | Onboarding | [ETSI TS 119 602], GenNot_05 |
| ONBOARD-LC-02 | Lifecycle actions (cancellation, certificate revocation) SHALL act on the organisational entity, not on the technical product it operates. | Onboarding | [CIR 2025/848] Art. 9 |
| ONBOARD-LC-03 | A change to a technical product the entity operates that does not affect eligibility SHALL be reflected as a notification update, not de-onboarding; a change that makes the entity ineligible SHALL lead to its cancellation (effect of ONBOARD-LC-01). | Onboarding | -- |