Digital identity—verifying who someone is in digital transactions—is foundational to government digital services. Citizens expect to access government services online, but government must ensure services reach legitimate recipients and personal information is protected. Digital identity bridges this gap.
This guide provides a framework for government digital identity, addressing authentication, identity proofing, privacy, and the practical challenges of enabling secure citizen access.
The Digital Identity Challenge
Why Digital Identity Matters
Digital identity enables and constrains government digital services:
Service access: Citizens need to prove who they are to access benefits, records, and services.
Fraud prevention: Without identity verification, government programs are vulnerable to fraud.
Privacy protection: Strong identity ensures personal information goes only to the right person.
User experience: Friction in identity verification affects whether citizens can use digital services.
The Government Context
Government digital identity faces unique challenges:
Universal service obligation: Government serves everyone—including those without smartphones, bank accounts, or other common identity tools.
High-value transactions: Government services often involve significant benefits or sensitive information requiring strong identity assurance.
Privacy scrutiny: Government identity activities face heightened privacy concern and oversight.
Legacy complexity: Existing identity systems vary by agency and program.
Fraud targeting: Government programs are attractive fraud targets.
Digital Identity Framework
Identity Lifecycle
Digital identity involves multiple stages:
Identity proofing: Establishing that a digital identity represents a real person. Verifying claimed identity.
Authentication: Confirming that someone returning to a service is the same person who established identity.
Authorization: Determining what an authenticated person can access.
Identity management: Ongoing management—updates, recovery, revocation.
Identity Assurance Levels
Not all identity scenarios need the same rigor:
NIST Identity Assurance Levels (IALs):
IAL1: Self-asserted identity with no identity proofing. Suitable for low-risk transactions.
IAL2: Identity proofing to moderate confidence. Evidence presentation and validation; remote or in-person.
IAL3: Identity proofing to high confidence. In-person identity verification with trained personnel.
Authentication Assurance Levels (AALs):
AAL1: Single-factor authentication. Password or single factor.
AAL2: Multi-factor authentication. Two or more authentication factors.
AAL3: Cryptographic authentication with hardware token. Highest assurance.
Match assurance level to transaction risk. Not everything needs maximum security.
Identity Proofing Approaches
Establishing identity:
Knowledge-based verification: Questions about credit history, address history, etc. Increasingly deprecated due to data breach exposure.
Document verification: Validating government-issued identity documents (driver's license, passport). Can be in-person or remote.
Biometric matching: Matching biometric (photo, fingerprint) against authoritative source. Often combined with document verification.
Trusted referee: Using trusted sources (employer, bank, in-person verification) to vouch for identity.
Remote proofing considerations:
- Document authenticity verification
- Liveness detection (confirming live person, not photo)
- Selfie matching to document photo
- Address verification
Authentication Approaches
Confirming returning users:
Authentication factors:
Something you know: Passwords, PINs, security questions.
Something you have: Phone, hardware token, smart card.
Something you are: Biometrics (fingerprint, face, voice).
Modern authentication patterns:
Passkeys/FIDO2: Phishing-resistant cryptographic authentication. Emerging best practice.
Mobile push: Authentication via mobile app notification.
One-time passwords: Codes via SMS or authenticator app.
PIV/CAC: Government-issued smart cards for employees and some citizens.
Implementation Considerations
Shared Services vs. Agency Solutions
Approaches to government identity:
Shared identity services: Central identity service used across agencies (Login.gov, ID.me).
Pros: Consistent user experience, efficiency, specialized expertise.
Cons: Single point of failure, dependency on shared service evolution.
Agency-specific solutions: Each agency manages own identity.
Pros: Agency control, specialized requirements addressed.
Cons: Inconsistent experience, duplication, varying capability.
Federated approach: Accept identities from multiple sources (government and commercial).
Pros: User choice, leverage existing identities.
Cons: Consistency challenges, reliance on external providers.
Equity and Accessibility
Government identity must serve everyone:
Digital divide: Not everyone has smartphones or internet access. In-person and alternative channels needed.
Document access: Some populations lack standard identity documents. Alternative proofing pathways needed.
Accessibility: Identity systems must be accessible to people with disabilities.
Language: Diverse populations require multilingual support.
Privacy Protection
Government identity raises privacy concerns:
Data minimization: Collect only identity data needed for purpose.
Consent and transparency: Clear about what data is collected and how used.
Retention limits: Don't retain identity data beyond legitimate need.
Security: Strong protection for identity data.
Surveillance concerns: Avoid creating identity systems that enable pervasive surveillance.
Implementation Approach
Starting Point Assessment
Understanding current state:
Inventory: What identity systems exist across agencies?
Requirements: What assurance levels are needed for different services?
Gaps: Where are current capabilities insufficient?
Pain points: What identity issues affect service delivery and user experience?
Strategy Development
Defining the target:
Model selection: Shared services, agency-managed, or hybrid.
Assurance strategy: How different assurance levels will be addressed.
Technology choices: Platform and vendor selection.
Migration approach: How existing systems and users transition.
Implementation Phases
Building capability:
Foundation: Core identity infrastructure, initial agency adoption.
Expansion: Additional agencies and services, enhanced capabilities.
Optimization: Experience improvement, advanced features, analytics.
Key Takeaways
-
Match assurance to risk: Not every transaction needs maximum security. Right-size identity requirements.
-
Prioritize user experience: Friction in identity prevents digital adoption. Balance security with usability.
-
Address equity: Government serves everyone. Identity systems must accommodate diverse populations.
-
Privacy by design: Build privacy protection into identity architecture, not as afterthought.
-
Plan for evolution: Identity technology and threats evolve. Build for adaptability.
Frequently Asked Questions
Should government use commercial identity providers? Federated approaches accepting commercial identities can expand access and leverage existing relationships. Considerations include: assurance level validation, privacy, cost, and dependency.
How do we handle identity for people without documents? Alternative pathways needed: trusted referee programs, in-person verification with alternative evidence, progressive identity building over time.
What about biometrics and privacy? Biometrics offer strong identity verification but raise privacy concerns. Implement with: consent, data minimization, appropriate security, and oversight.
How do we address fraud without creating friction? Risk-based approaches: lightweight identity for low-risk transactions; step-up to stronger verification when needed. Fraud detection analytics to identify suspicious patterns.
Mobile-first or web-first? Both matter for government populations. Mobile-first experiences for broad accessibility; web options for those without smartphones or preferring desktop.
What about identity for businesses, not just citizens? Business identity has different requirements—registration verification, authorized representative designation. Separate but related to citizen identity.