Proposed shared age-assurance infrastructure with admission and commercial governance
AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
AgeAware was an interoperability proposal and proof-of-concept project developed in the euCONSENT ASBL context. Its August 2024 consultation specification described how participants, technical components and commercial arrangements would fit together; a January 2025 update credited providers helping design the proof of concept.
Design and development state
The consultation located admission criteria, fit-and-proper review, licensing, tally access and suspension within an ASBL-governed ecosystem. It proposed negotiated core-component exclusivity and three-year commercial-scheme exclusivity followed by contestability. January's account credited VerifyMy, Yoti and AgeChecked with detailed design. AVPA's later retrospective describes development through 2025 and private alternatives. Those records support a proposal and development history, rather than an operating compulsory network or executed exclusivity concession.
euCONSENT → AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
published a proposed admission, billing and governance design for
Consultation5 August 2024; final approval/implementation not obtained.
Version1.0 consultation locates admission criteria, fit-and-proper review, licensing, tally access and participant suspension in ASBL-governed ecosystem. Includes negotiated core-component exclusivity and proposed three-year commercial-scheme exclusivity, then contestability. This is a published proposal, not an executed concession or current compulsory gate.
Tony Iain Allen / Tony Allen → AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
is named as the required ACCS approver for the draft specification of
Draft5 August 2024; rules2026 must not be applied retrospectively without support.
Document-control table identifies T Allen, ACCS Programme Director, with Approver in the Action column; completion Date is blank and no signed approval is shown. This is proposed approval authority, not a completed decision. It raises a bounded conflict-management question beside later2026 certification design restrictions; not a demonstrated breach.
Age Verification Providers Association → AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
describes the project's demonstration mission as fulfilled alongside private alternatives
Undated current page captured9 September 2026.
Current AVPA retrospective says ASBL technology development continued until2025 and points to private-sector alternative ecosystems. Does not establish company dissolution or exact service termination, but limits depicting the2024 design as a current mandatory network.
AgeChecked (credited provider brand) → AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
is credited with detailed design work for
Recipient account9 January 2025, following5 August 2024 draft.
January 2025 project account identifies provider as ASBL member from original project team helping design proof of concept. Draft2024 reviewer listing is a separate proposed-role record. No compensation, exclusive award, veto or customer deployment shown.
Commissioned AgeAware rights review · reported January 2025 → AgeAware interoperability proposal and proof of concept
was commissioned to examine rights implications of
Reported 9 January 2025; exact commission date and delivery date not established.
The proposed review's stated subject was AgeAware's child-rights and broader human-rights impact. The participant called it independent; no independence or completion audit was performed.
Consultation5 August 2024; final approval/implementation not obtained.
Version1.0 consultation locates admission criteria, fit-and-proper review, licensing, tally access and participant suspension in ASBL-governed ecosystem. Includes negotiated core-component exclusivity and proposed three-year commercial-scheme exclusivity, then contestability. This is a published proposal, not an executed concession or current compulsory gate.
Draft5 August 2024; rules2026 must not be applied retrospectively without support.
Document-control table identifies T Allen, ACCS Programme Director, with Approver in the Action column; completion Date is blank and no signed approval is shown. This is proposed approval authority, not a completed decision. It raises a bounded conflict-management question beside later2026 certification design restrictions; not a demonstrated breach.
Recipient account9 January 2025, following5 August 2024 draft.
Reported by the cited source
January 2025 project account identifies provider as ASBL member from original project team helping design proof of concept. Draft2024 reviewer listing is a separate proposed-role record. No compensation, exclusive award, veto or customer deployment shown.
Recipient account9 January 2025, following5 August 2024 draft.
Reported by the cited source
January 2025 project account identifies provider as ASBL member from original project team helping design proof of concept. Draft2024 reviewer listing is a separate proposed-role record. No compensation, exclusive award, veto or customer deployment shown.
Recipient account9 January 2025, following5 August 2024 draft.
Reported by the cited source
January 2025 project account identifies provider as ASBL member from original project team helping design proof of concept. Draft2024 reviewer listing is a separate proposed-role record. No compensation, exclusive award, veto or customer deployment shown.
Current AVPA retrospective says ASBL technology development continued until2025 and points to private-sector alternative ecosystems. Does not establish company dissolution or exact service termination, but limits depicting the2024 design as a current mandatory network.
Reported 9 January 2025; exact commission date and delivery date not established.
Reported by the cited source
The proposed review's stated subject was AgeAware's child-rights and broader human-rights impact. The participant called it independent; no independence or completion audit was performed.
Specific commissioned-work bridge to named contributors already documented in the eSafety-cited CSEA principles report; not a claim that eSafety commissioned AgeAware or that either report dictated policy.