Fix incompatibility between LCW and older admin dashboard versions

Question

Fix incompatibility between LCW and older admin dashboard versions

Closed this issue in 15 hours · 7 comments

Answer 1 · 2024-10-10T18:39:09.000Z

I've been working today on some problems with the JFF deployment of the admin dashboard, and have fixed two problems:
their admin dashboard was issuing credentials with a non-uri credential id. I've created a new version of the dashboard that remains issuing VC1 only, but fixes the credential.id problem: https://hub.docker.com/layers/digitalcredentials/dashboard/0.1.2/images/sha256-ef610[…]d39f401f43fe1881b5e3c47229a4231edd86e8d04b8e7?context=explore

I created this from a pre-VC2 commit of the dashboard so that JFF wouldn't have to upgrade completely to VC2, which might have messed up their bistring status list, which used the github implementation.

Answer 2 · 2024-10-10T18:41:18.000Z

Also discovered that the new jsonLD libs in the wallet are likely stricter and didn't like a uri for the issuer.image.id that had a space in it. Replacing the space with the escape code fixes that problem.

Answer 3 · 2024-10-10T18:48:58.000Z

So after those two fixes, the JFF issuer is now issuing credentials that I can copy/paste into the latest LCW where they are accepted and verify properly.

The problem now, however, is that when trying to add the JFF issued credentials to the latest LCW directly using the deeplink, the transaction service (workflow coordinator) returns a 500. My suspicion is that the request from the LCW to the transaction manager includes a didAuth that has been created and signed using the latest VC libs, but the older version of the dashboard on JFF uses older libs that may be balking for some reason at the newer didAuth.

Investigating...

Answer 4 · 2024-10-10T18:56:50.000Z

This is the didAuth posted from credentialRequest.ts in the LCW:

{
  "@context": [
    "https://www.w3.org/ns/credentials/v2",
    "https://w3id.org/security/suites/ed25519-2020/v1"
  ],
  "type": [
    "VerifiablePresentation"
  ],
  "holder": "did:key:z6MknevGC6sQwic5wSgZJ49uoyrK6oK4EuqEtFLHbqzh9tch",
  "proof": {
    "type": "Ed25519Signature2020",
    "created": "2024-10-10T17:24:41Z",
    "verificationMethod": "did:key:z6MknevGC6sQwic5wSgZJ49uoyrK6oK4EuqEtFLHbqzh9tch#z6MknevGC6sQwic5wSgZJ49uoyrK6oK4EuqEtFLHbqzh9tch",
    "proofPurpose": "authentication",
    "challenge": "969d28e4-4f9b-4ac6-842d-af023477dbb3",
    "proofValue": "z2w5DT7DVqYTuVop2jjP1psBHd2AVBW66YhfmXr8rFm3QskbUSNCzxA6WRg91gyB6uNLbuERMgGe7otYHEYCErbMf"
  }
}

Answer 5 · 2024-10-10T19:04:27.000Z

So best guess is that the older VC libraries (version 1) in the JFF installation can't deal with the newer VerifiablePresentation (version 2) that the LCW is posting to the workflow coordinator's endpoint.

Answer 6 · 2024-10-17T18:24:17.000Z

Confirmed that the LCW is now using VC2 for its didAuth VPs. And so any issuer that wants to issue credentials using the deeplink will have to upgrade to the latest transaction-service. JFF upgraded to the latest transaction-service and it worked.

Answer 7 · 2024-10-17T18:52:07.000Z

We can close this ticket