Signing authority is the delegated right to create digital signatures on behalf of the controller of an authoritativekey pair, explicitly excluding rotation authority. This limited authority enables custodial arrangements where operational signing can be delegated while the original controller retains ultimate control through exclusive rotation rights.
Related Concepts
No related concepts available
Comprehensive Explanation
signing-authority
Official Definition
Signing authority is formally defined in the KERI protocol as the authority to sign on behalf of the controller of an authoritative key pair. This authority is characterized as a limited right because it explicitly does not include rotation authority—the ability to rotate keys and change the key state of an AID (Autonomic Identifier).
The canonical definition establishes that signing authority represents permission to create digital signatures for non-establishment events and operational transactions, while rotation authority encompasses the more privileged capability to modify the controlling keys themselves through establishment events.
Clearly document which roles hold signing vs rotation authority
Establish policies for signing authority scope and limitations
Define procedures for rotation authority exercise (key rotation)
Implement audit logging for all signing authority usage
Multi-Signature Configuration: When using multi-sig for signing authority:
Set thresholds appropriate to risk level (e.g., 2-of-3 for high-value operations)
Ensure rotation authority threshold is independent of signing threshold
Document which parties hold which key shares
Establish coordination procedures for threshold signature collection
Custodial Arrangements: For custodial agent relationships:
Formalize the scope of signing authority in service agreements
Ensure rotation authority remains with the principal
Define service level agreements for signing operations
Establish procedures for custodian replacement via rotation
Implement monitoring for unauthorized signing activity
Key Management: Operational considerations:
Store signing keys with appropriate security for their risk level
Store rotation keys with highest security (offline, HSM, multi-party)
Implement key rotation schedules for signing keys
Maintain secure backup of rotation authority keys
Test rotation procedures regularly
Compliance and Audit: For regulated environments:
Maintain audit logs of all signing authority usage
Implement controls to prevent unauthorized signing
Document authority delegation chains
Establish incident response procedures for key compromise
Ensure rotation authority can be exercised rapidly if needed
Official Abbreviations: While "signing authority" has no standard abbreviation, it is often discussed in conjunction with "rotation authority" as part of KERI's split control authority architecture.
Governance Context
Role in the vLEI Ecosystem
Within the vLEI (verifiable Legal Entity Identifier) ecosystem, signing authority plays a critical role in enabling scalable credential issuance while maintaining security. The vLEI governance framework leverages signing authority separation to enable:
Operational Delegation: Legal Entity Authorized Representatives (LARs) can be granted signing authority to issue and present credentials on behalf of a legal entity, while the entity's root control (rotation authority) remains with designated officers.
Multi-Signature Coordination: In QVI (Qualified vLEI Issuer) operations, multiple authorized representatives may hold signing authority as part of a multi-sig group, with thresholds requiring cooperation for credential issuance, while rotation authority for the QVI's root AID remains with a separate governance body.
Service Provider Models: Organizations can delegate signing authority to managed service providers (custodial agents) for day-to-day credential operations without surrendering ultimate control over their organizational identifier.
GLEIF Root AID: The GLEIF Root AID has rotation authority held by GLEIF's highest governance body (Root GARs - GLEIF Authorized Representatives)
GLEIF External Delegated AID (GEDA): The GEDA receives delegated signing authority to issue QVI credentials, while GLEIF retains rotation authority over the GEDA through the root
Operational Separation: External GARs hold signing authority for GEDA operations, enabling QVI credential issuance without requiring Root GAR involvement in every transaction
This hierarchical authority structure enables GLEIF to scale credential issuance operations while maintaining cryptographic control over the root of trust.
Related Governance Entities
Signing authority separation enables several key governance patterns:
Custodial Agents: Third-party service providers that hold signing authority while clients retain rotation authority
Non-Establishment Event Signing: Create signatures for interaction events that do not change key state
Credential Operations: Issue, present, and verify credentials using the AID
Data Anchoring: Create cryptographic commitments to external data through seals
Message Authentication: Sign protocol messages for secure communication
Witness Interaction: Submit events to witnesses and collect receipts
Threshold Participation:
In multi-sig configurations, signing authority holders contribute signatures toward meeting the signing threshold
Each holder's signature weight is defined in the current key state
Threshold satisfaction requires cooperation among authorized signers
Limitations
Critically, signing authority does not include:
Prohibited Actions:
Key Rotation: Cannot create rotation events that change the authoritative key set
Threshold Modification: Cannot alter signing or rotation thresholds
Witness Changes: Cannot modify the witness pool configuration
Delegation: Cannot delegate the AID to create child identifiers
Configuration Changes: Cannot modify AID configuration parameters
These limitations are enforced cryptographically—rotation events require signatures from keys committed to in the previous establishment event's next key digest list, which are distinct from the current signing keys.
Revocability:
Signing authority can be revoked unilaterally by the rotation authority holder
Revocation occurs through a rotation event that establishes new signing keys
The signing authority holder cannot prevent or block this revocation
This "fire the custodian" capability is fundamental to KERI's security model
Technical Implementation
Split Control Authority Architecture
KERI implements signing authority separation through a dual key set architecture:
First Key Set (Current Keys):
Used for signing authority
Exposed and active for operational signing
Defined in the k (keys) field of establishment events
Subject to the kt (current threshold) for signature validation
Second Key Set (Pre-Rotated Keys):
Reserved for rotation authority
Committed to via cryptographic digests in the n (next) field
Not exposed until needed for rotation
Subject to the nt (next threshold) for rotation validation
Partial Rotation Mechanism
The partial rotation mechanism enables signing authority delegation:
Initial Setup: During inception or rotation, the controller commits to next keys via digests
Authority Split: Current keys are distributed to signing authority holders; next keys remain with rotation authority holder
Threshold Configuration: Signing threshold (kt) and rotation threshold (nt) can be configured independently
Operational Phase: Signing authority holders use current keys for day-to-day operations
Revocation: Rotation authority holder can rotate to new keys without cooperation from signing authority holders
Custodial Rotation Pattern
The canonical use case for signing authority separation is custodial rotation:
Inception Event:
Current Keys (k): [custodian_key_1, custodian_key_2]
Current Threshold (kt): "2" // Requires both custodian signatures
Next Keys (n): [digest(owner_rotation_key)]
Next Threshold (nt): "1" // Owner can rotate alone
In this configuration:
The custodian holds both current keys and can sign operational events
The owner holds the pre-rotated key and can rotate without custodian cooperation
If the custodian is compromised or needs to be replaced, the owner rotates to new keys
If signing authority keys are compromised, attacker can sign unauthorized events
However, attacker cannot rotate keys or change key state
Rotation authority holder can revoke compromised signing keys
Damage is limited to events signed before detection and rotation
Custodian Malfeasance:
Malicious custodian with signing authority can sign unauthorized events
Cannot prevent owner from rotating keys and revoking authority
Cannot modify rotation keys or delegation structure
Witness receipts provide audit trail of custodian actions
Collusion Attacks:
In multi-sig scenarios, threshold prevents single-party abuse
Collusion among signing authority holders can authorize events
Rotation authority holder can still revoke all signing keys
Witness network provides duplicity detection
Best Practices
Separation of Duties: Keep signing and rotation keys on separate systems
Threshold Configuration: Use multi-sig for signing authority when possible
Key Rotation Schedule: Regularly rotate signing keys as a security hygiene practice
Audit Logging: Monitor signing authority usage for anomalies
Incident Response: Have procedures for rapid key rotation if compromise is detected
Witness Selection: Choose witnesses that provide adequate duplicity detection
Backup Rotation Keys: Securely store rotation authority keys with highest protection level
Adoption and Usability
Mainstream User Accessibility
Signing authority separation is considered critical for mainstream adoption of KERI-based identity systems because:
Reduced Complexity: Users can delegate operational signing to managed services without surrendering control
Professional Management: Service providers can offer secure key management without lock-in
Recovery Options: Users retain ability to recover from custodian failure or compromise
Familiar Model: Similar to banking relationships where users retain ultimate account control
Service Provider Business Models
Signing authority enables sustainable business models for identity service providers:
Managed Services: Providers can offer signing-as-a-service with clear value proposition
No Lock-In: Users can switch providers without losing their identifier
Liability Management: Providers hold signing authority but not ultimate control
Scalability: Providers can serve many users without requiring per-user infrastructure
Enterprise Adoption
For enterprises, signing authority separation enables:
Operational Delegation: Day-to-day signing can be delegated to operational teams
Governance Control: Executive or board-level control over rotation authority
Compliance: Clear audit trails and separation of duties
Disaster Recovery: Rotation authority can be held in secure offline storage
Conclusion
Signing authority represents a fundamental architectural innovation in KERI that enables practical, scalable, and secure identity systems. By separating operational signing capabilities from ultimate control authority, KERI provides a foundation for:
Custodial services that don't create lock-in
Delegation hierarchies that maintain security properties
Enterprise governance with appropriate separation of duties
Mainstream adoption through managed service models
This separation is not merely a convenience feature but a core security property that enables KERI to bridge the gap between self-sovereign principles and real-world usability requirements. The ability to delegate signing authority while retaining rotation authority provides users with both operational convenience and ultimate sovereignty—a combination that is essential for widespread adoption of decentralized identity systems.