Loading vLEI.wiki
Fetching knowledge base...
Fetching knowledge base...
This comprehensive explanation has been generated from 17 GitHub source documents. All source documents are searchable here.
Last updated: October 7, 2025
This content is meant to be consumed by AI agents via MCP. Click here to get the MCP configuration.
Note: In rare cases it may contain LLM hallucinations.
For authoritative documentation, please consult the official GLEIF vLEI trainings and the ToIP Glossary.
In KERI, a jury represents the aggregated collection of juror entities or components that collectively examine and validate key event histories. The jury's primary function is to perform duplicity detection on events and event receipts, ensuring that the event history from a given controller is non-duplicitous and has been properly witnessed by a sufficient number of non-duplicitous witnesses.
The jury operates as part of KERI's distributed validation infrastructure, examining entries from one or more Key Event Receipt Logs (KERLs) and Duplicitous Event Logs (DELs) to assess whether an AID's event history can be trusted by a validator.
The jury mechanism is a critical component of KERI's Advanced Indirect Mode operations, working alongside judges to provide enhanced security and duplicity detection capabilities. While basic KERI operations rely on witnesses and watchers for event validation and propagation, the jury provides an additional layer of validation when higher assurance is required.
The jury mechanism is part of KERI's Advanced Indirect Mode and is not required for basic KERI operations. Implementation should consider:
The jury's fundamental task is detecting external inconsistency - situations where multiple verifiable but conflicting versions of a KEL exist for the same identifier. This is distinct from internal inconsistency, which is prevented by the self-certifying root-of-trust of the KEL itself. When a controller produces duplicitous events (conflicting versions of their event history), the jury examines the evidence to determine which version, if any, represents the authoritative state.
When duplicity is detected - particularly after a key rotation event - the jury participates in KERI's recovery process. This involves applying superseding rules defined in the KERI specification to resolve inconsistencies and restore system integrity. The jury works in conjunction with judges to evaluate competing event sequences and reach consensus on the authoritative KEL state.
The jury operates within KERI's duplicity evident infrastructure, which makes duplicitous behavior detectable rather than hidden (as in blockchain systems) or fostered (as in traditional DNS/CA systems). This approach enables ambient verifiability - the ability for any validator to detect duplicity anywhere, at any time, without requiring trusted third parties.
The jury mechanism supports graduated trust assessment, where validators can dynamically appraise the security of an identifier's infrastructure based on the level of risk in a given transaction. Higher-risk interactions may require stronger jury consensus, while lower-risk interactions may rely on simpler witness validation.