Topic starter
24/06/2026 10:16 pm
TL;DR: Digital identity wallets are gaining momentum as governments and standards bodies push beyond passwords, with Belgium’s itsme showing high adoption, monthly transaction volumes, and eIDAS 2.0 setting a broader European direction according to 1Kosmos. The governance problem is no longer just authentication, but how to prove who is acting online without centralising more personal data than security programmes can safely protect.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by 1Kosmos: “Digital Identity Spotlight: Belgium”.
By the numbers:
- More than 80% of the population has used it, making 25 to 35 million transactions per month.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams govern digital identity wallets in an existing IAM programme?
A: Treat digital identity wallets as part of the human identity control stack, not as a separate pilot.
Q: Why do digital identity wallets change the privacy risk model?
A: Wallets reduce privacy risk because they can share only the minimum claim needed for a transaction instead of exposing a full identity record.
Q: What signals show that wallet-based identity is actually working?
A: The strongest signals are fewer password resets, lower account takeover exposure, less unnecessary identity-data storage, and more transactions completed with minimal claims.
Practitioner guidance
- Define wallet trust boundaries Map which claims your services will accept from a digital identity wallet, which issuers you will trust, and what assurance level is required for each transaction type.
- Minimise data collection at the relying party Stop designing workflows that require full identity records when an age, entitlement, or eligibility claim is sufficient for the transaction.
- Align proofing with presentation risk Require device binding, liveness checks, and issuer assurance for any wallet flow that can affect regulated access, payments, or sensitive services.
Bottom line: Digital identity wallets are changing IAM from password-centric access control to claim-centric trust governance.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
25/06/2026 6:55 am
Digital identity wallets are a response to identity overexposure, not just weak authentication: The article’s real shift is from proving a password to proving a claim with minimal disclosure. That changes the governance problem from secret protection to assertion control, relying-party trust, and consented data sharing. For IAM teams, this is a programme design issue, not a point solution.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What should teams do when digital identity wallets cross from government to private services?
A: Teams should align federation, assurance mapping, and revocation rules before they allow a wallet credential to span sectors. Cross-domain use only works when the relying party can trust the issuer, validate presentation, and limit the data retained after the transaction ends.
👉 Read our full editorial: Digital identity wallets could reshape online trust and access