Status List Plugin Miscellaneous issues

[gmulhearn]

Noting some miscellaneous issues i've ran into while testing the status_list plugin.

Can break these out into seperate tickets if further discussion is desired

OpenAPI Schema Issues

1. all fields of the StatusListDef schema object are nullable/optional, why?
2. list status list def results does not match schema ([..] instead of { results: [...] })

Config Issues

1. attempt to create status list without specifying shard_size in the request body after agent launch will fail since Config is not loaded yet (also applicable for list_size)

Conformance Issues

1. The returned JWT for the W3C VCDM 2 BitString status list credential does not follow standard the W3C VCDM 2.0 JOSE securing mechanism structure (application/vc+jwt)
2. the BitStringStatusListEntry credentialStatus objects returned from the assign API/function should represent statusListIndex as a JSON string rather than as a JSON number. "123" instead of 123

According to the W3C securing VCs with JOSE spec (https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-jose-cose/#securing-with-jose) a VCDM2.0 is secured by embedding the application/vc structure (the VCDM) as the body content of the JWT.

It does not suggest that the VCDM should be embedded within a "vc": {..} field of the JWT's body content.

Therefore i don't think ACA-Py should encode it's JWT-secured BitString status list VCs with this "vc": field.

Example

ACA-Py returns this JWT for a secured bitstring status list:

eyJ0eXAiOiAiSldUIiwgImtpZCI6ICJkaWQ6a2V5OnpEbmFlcTJKcDh0SE5vbzNXZXVnczd2RlRHeFB4WHN0MU44cVdCbmdpbXRTTW41MUIjekRuYWVxMkpwOHRITm9vM1dldWdzN3ZGVEd4UHhYc3QxTjhxV0JuZ2ltdFNNbjUxQiIsICJhbGciOiAiRVMyNTYifQ.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.ZY1J7pxvdSc3ZYXF9nNGIY80DG1WfR2wh7ytrW2nUKJ6SvCnm5HJeBrGIKvSA13bg1a-RYsKPmn5fH4cEI2SlA

which has contents of:

{
  "iss": "did:key:zDnaeq2Jp8tHNoo3Weugs7vFTGxPxXst1N8qWBngimtSMn51B",
  "nbf": 1761033860,
  "jti": "urn:uuid:1",
  "sub": "https://example.com/1",
  "vc": {
    "@context": [
      "https://www.w3.org/ns/credentials/v2"
    ],
    "id": "https://example.com/1",
    "type": [
      "VerifiableCredential",
      "BitstringStatusListCredential"
    ],
    "issuer": "did:key:zDnaeq2Jp8tHNoo3Weugs7vFTGxPxXst1N8qWBngimtSMn51B",
    "validFrom": "2025-10-21T08:04:20.971559+00:00",
    "validUntil": "2026-10-21T08:04:20.971559+00:00",
    "credentialSubject": {
      "id": "https://example.com/1#list",
      "type": "BitstringStatusList",
      "statusPurpose": "revocation",
      "encodedList": "H4sIAIQ-92gC_-3BMQEAAADCoPVPbQwfoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIC3AYbSVKsAQAAA"
    }
  }
}

this appears to be the VCDM 1.X way of securing VCs with JWTs.

my reading is that JOSE-secured VCDM 2.0's should instead have contents like so:

{
  "@context": [
    "https://www.w3.org/ns/credentials/v2"
  ],
  "id": "https://example.com/1",
  "type": [
    "VerifiableCredential",
    "BitstringStatusListCredential"
  ],
  "issuer": "did:key:zDnaeq2Jp8tHNoo3Weugs7vFTGxPxXst1N8qWBngimtSMn51B",
  "validFrom": "2025-10-21T08:04:20.971559+00:00",
  "validUntil": "2026-10-21T08:04:20.971559+00:00",
  "credentialSubject": {
    "id": "https://example.com/1#list",
    "type": "BitstringStatusList",
    "statusPurpose": "revocation",
    "encodedList": "H4sIAIQ-92gC_-3BMQEAAADCoPVPbQwfoAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIC3AYbSVKsAQAAA"
  }
}

Logic Issues

• the /status-list/assign/{supported_cred_id}/creds/{cred_id} API allows the same cred + cred ID to be bound multiple times. But then other APIs break because of this. e.g. if you try to then fetch the entry, you get 500: Multiple StatusListCred records located for {'definition_id': '08a4f43b-a0e8-48a5-b0b5-6a495dcf204c', 'credential_id': '1'}.