Topic starter
24/10/2026 8:54 pm
TL;DR: Procivis explains that Lithuania's national EUDI Wallet sandbox is aimed at testing issuance, verification and relying-party acceptance before rollout. Wallet programmes usually fail at the handoffs between organisations, so these tests matter for trust and cross-border use.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Procivis: “Lithuania Selects Procivis for the National European Digital Identity Wallet Sandbox”.
Key questions
Q: Why does interoperability matter so much in EUDI wallet programmes?
A: Interoperability matters because a wallet only has value if issuers, verifiers and relying parties can interpret the same credential in the same way.
Q: What breaks when digital identity assurance is tested too late?
A: When assurance is tested too late, teams discover mismatches in policy, attribute handling, verification logic and relying-party expectations after the programme is already committed to rollout.
Q: How should governments validate digital identity wallets before national rollout?
A: Governments should validate digital identity wallets in controlled environments that test issuance, verification, relying-party integration and cross-border use cases together.
Practitioner guidance
- Build a relying-party test plan Validate every external service that will consume wallet credentials, including public services and private-sector relying parties, before production enrolment begins.
- Define readiness criteria for assurance and interoperability Set measurable acceptance thresholds for issuance, verification, cross-border presentation and exception handling so programme status reflects operational reality.
- Use sandbox testing to expose trust gaps Exercise end-to-end identity journeys with real service integrations to find where policy, presentation or verification logic diverges.
Bottom line: National wallet programmes fail most often at the boundaries between issuance, verification and relying-party acceptance, not inside the wallet itself.
Glossary terms: Digital Identity Wallet, Relying Party, Cross-Border Verification, Identity Sandbox
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 6 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
25/10/2026 11:13 am
National digital identity now depends on pre-production assurance. Lithuania's sandbox shows that digital identity programmes are maturing from policy statements into evidence-building exercises. That is the right direction because wallets, relying parties and verification rules create compound risk when they are not tested together. The practitioner lesson is simple: trust in digital identity should be demonstrated before national scale, not assumed after deployment.
A question worth separating out:
Q: When should identity teams treat wallet readiness as a governance issue?
A: Identity teams should treat wallet readiness as a governance issue whenever multiple organisations, legal regimes or assurance levels depend on the same digital identity model. The technical stack cannot resolve misaligned ownership, policy interpretation or acceptance rules on its own. Governance has to define who decides, who validates and what counts as ready.
👉 Read our full editorial: Lithuania's EUDI wallet sandbox shifts identity testing earlier
This post was modified 6 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group