Age assurance components

What the clause says

A component establishes an age attribute from something a person knows, possesses or is, from a trusted attestation, or from a trained assessor's judgement. Systems can combine components to raise trust.

What it supplies to a comparison

The component type predicts which tests are meaningful. A document check raises document validity and binding questions; a face estimate raises error distribution and presentation attack questions.

Evidence to keep

• A list of every component in the system, with its type and its input.
• The combination rule that says how components are weighed or chained.

What the evidence looks like

For 4.1.1, the first artefact is A list of every component in the system, with its type and its input.. The second is The combination rule that says how components are weighed or chained.. If 4.1.1 has no first artefact, the practice is unproven at 4.1.1, and the report should record the absence rather than infer the practice from a policy.

Questions for the provider

1. Which component type is doing the work at the decision point?
2. Does the combination rule show how a weak component is compensated, or merely that it exists?

How it connects to the draft

Age assurance components belongs to 4 characterisation, and it gives the analysis one fixed point: The component type predicts which tests are meaningful. A document check raises document validity and binding questions; a face estimate raises error . A comparison that cannot place a result against 4.1.1 is measuring something the framework has not defined, and the report should say so.

In the register, 4.1.1 is read beside the unit that tests it, and where it sets an objective rather than a number, that unit turns the objective into a question and an evidence artefact.