TECHNICAL / PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE
Clear boundaries. Purposeful evidence.
Explore the proposed OPASS architecture: versioned profiles, scoped passes, claim-specific verification, protected exchange, and optional independent timestamp proofs. Capabilities require implementation and deployment validation.
01 / Technical overview
A common core. Clear system boundaries.
A versioned orientation profile connects the access point, temporary pass, interaction, and organizational response. These are logical architecture layers: an initial deployment can use one application, background workers, and managed storage.
Access & orientation
Temporary pass
Interaction & communication
Evidence & verification
Protected exchange
Audit & timestamp proofs
Organization measurement
Integration & operations
Independent proofs, not payments or participant wallets.
PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE
Capabilities described here require implementation and deployment validation. Organization isolation, recovery, retention, key management, and evidence checks must be tested before activation.
02 / Purpose-led trust
Verification and protection, matched to purpose.
Verification that matches the purpose.
Different interactions need different kinds of confirmation. Opening a pass, submitting a request, receiving an acknowledgment, and completing a service are separate moments. OPASS is designed to preserve those distinctions and apply the evidence checks chosen for the interaction.
A food request can remain open until the organization records the next action. A queue entry can progress to a counter call. A completed service can carry its own confirmation. People and teams can see what has been recorded and what still needs attention.
A submitted request is not a completed service.
Protection when sensitive information is needed.
Some interactions require additional protection, such as a clinic check-in that needs a name and date of birth. OPASS is designed to collect only necessary information, direct it to authorized recipients, and apply stronger security controls when sensitive details are involved. A pass can reference the interaction without displaying the underlying personal information.
Cryptographic exchange records can help establish what was sent and what the receiving system acknowledged. Optional independent timestamp proofs can support later checks that a selected record version existed by an anchoring point. The organization’s evidence requirements determine what confirms the underlying activity.