Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)

# Fix list: Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido)

From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/entrust-identity-verification, the October 2026 research run, assessed 14 October 2026. Grade B, 62.1 out of 100.

This is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public.

For a coding agent working on Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido): work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published.

## 1. Payments & pricing, 20 out of 100, up to 10 more on the total

Why it scored 20: Read with the hosted rubric. No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Entrust's pricing page answered 403. The G-Cloud 14 listing by Onfido Ltd gives £0.43 to £2.12 a transaction, a public range rather than a price list (10 of 20). The G-Cloud listing says a free trial with sandbox access exists, and the docs say sandbox requests aren't charged. We couldn't confirm whether a trial needs a card or a sales contact (10 of 20). Tokens are generated in the Dashboard by a person, and live checks need billing details first (0).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments):

The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).

- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.
- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for "contact sales" or prices behind a login.
- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.
- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).

Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.

Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol.

## 2. Security & auth, 58 out of 100, up to 7.4 more on the total

Why it scored 58: Two credential types. Region-specific API tokens (`api_live.`, `api_sandbox.`) sent as `Authorization: Token token=`, and from v3.6 OAuth client credentials with 60-minute access tokens, scopes and a per-application IP allowlist set in the Dashboard. Tokens stay valid until revoked and the docs advise rotation when staff leave (25 of 30). OAuth scopes allow a narrower credential, sandbox tokens can't manage live webhooks, and applicant deletion is queued with a configurable delay during which the applicant can be restored. No confirmation step for deletes (12 of 20). Responses carry text extracted from identity documents and watchlist hits, with no injection guidance found (3 of 15). Dashboard audit logs exist, must be enabled on the account, and can be pushed with an `audit_log.created` webhook (10 of 15). The G-Cloud listing names ISO/IEC 27001 (accredited 12 September 2023) and SOC 2 Type II. entrust.com/.well-known/security.txt and Entrust's security pages answered 403, and no bug bounty was found (8 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security):

- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.
- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.
- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.
- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.
- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.

Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing.

## 3. Reliability, 70 out of 100, up to 6 more on the total

Why it scored 70: Read with the hosted lines and scored on the Public API v3.6. status.onfido.com is a Statuspage with API, Dashboard, Document Verification, Facial Similarity, Watchlist, Webhooks and other components for the EU, US and CA regions (20). Eight incidents between 24 July and 30 September 2026. Two are labelled major and both were short, a Web SDK outage in all regions from 13:21 to 13:45 UTC on 1 September with a postmortem, and the UK eVisa government service down for 26 minutes on 22 September. A faulty deployment rejected valid tokens on the CA Public API from 14:30 to 15:30 UTC on 7 September, labelled minor, and US report processing was delayed for about an hour on 27 July. We scored 15 rather than 20 because a core API was unavailable in one region for an hour (15). Limits have numbers, 400 requests a minute in live (7 a second, burst 14) and 120 in sandbox (15). A 429 returns `rate_limit` with advice to try later. No Retry-After header and no idempotency key on POST were found (5). The UK G-Cloud 14 listing by Onfido Ltd states 99.5 per cent monthly uptime. It is a government framework listing, not a contract term on Entrust's own site, which we couldn't read (5). v3.6 has been generally available since 24 January 2023 (10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):

Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.

- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).
- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.
- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.
- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.
- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.
- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.

Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.

- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.
- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.
- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).
- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.
- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.

Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.

## 4. Agent ergonomics, 65 out of 100, up to 5.7 more on the total

Why it scored 65: No field selection. Applicant lists take `per_page` up to 500, while workflow run lists have a fixed page size of 20 (12 of 25). `page` and `per_page`, Link headers and `X-Total-Count`, and workflow run filters by status, tags, dates and applicant (16 of 20). Errors carry a type such as `validation_error`, `expired_token` or `geoblocked_request` with a message and field list (18 of 20). No idempotency key on POST. Webhooks are delivered at least once and the docs ask handlers to treat events as idempotent (6 of 20). Official server libraries in Java, Node.js, PHP, Python and Ruby, generated from the spec, with webhook verification built in. A verification still needs an applicant, a capture step by the end user and a check or workflow run (13 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics):

- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).
- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.
- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.
- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.
- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.

Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs.

## 5. Maintenance & community, 58 out of 100, up to 3.7 more on the total

Why it scored 58: The spec repository was refreshed on 31 August 2026 and tagged v6.2.0. The npm `@onfido/api` 6.2.0 and PyPI `onfido-python` 6.2.0 date from 21 and 22 May 2026 (20). Spec refreshes on 27 and 31 August, but fewer than three dated releases of the API or server libraries in the last 90 days were found (10 of 20). A closed service with a support address and public GitHub repositories. Issue response times weren't sampled (8 of 15). Current official libraries in five languages, regenerated from the spec (15). Libraries are MIT and generated with OpenAPI Generator. CI wasn't checked (5 of 10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance):

- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.
- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.
- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.
- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).
- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.

Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts.

## 6. Schema & documentation, 84 out of 100, up to 2.6 more on the total

Why it scored 84: Public OpenAPI 3.0 file for v3.6 in github.com/onfido/onfido-openapi-spec, MIT, with 64 paths and 85 operations (25). llms.txt and a Markdown copy of each docs page (10). Operation descriptions have a median of 60 characters and 20 of 85 are under 40, though the guides explain workflow runs, checks and reports at length (13 of 20). The spec carries 44 enums and typed schemas, with webhook payloads and report breakdowns typed (12 of 15). The API reference documents an error object with `type`, `message` and `fields` and a table of codes per status. The spec itself holds few examples (12 of 15). A versioned path, a written versioning policy and tagged spec releases. The API release notes page has no entry after 27 February 2023 (12 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema):

APIs and MCP servers.

- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).
- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.
- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.
- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.
- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.
- 15, versioning and a public changelog.

Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference.

## 7. Transparency & trust, 70 out of 100, up to 2.6 more on the total

Made of editorial 52, provenance 87.

Why it scored 70: The OpenAPI spec and the server libraries are MIT. The service terms and the product privacy notice redirect to entrust.com, which answered 403 to every request, so they weren't read (12 of 30 on what we could read). The API reference says EU data is stored in Ireland with backup in Germany, sandbox data isn't processed by third parties, and deleted applicants are queued for deletion after a delay of at least 30 days by recommendation, set through client support (12 of 30). The versioning policy promises at least 18 months' notice before a version is deprecated, sent by email every 30 days and by response headers (18 of 20). Three regional hosts with stated storage locations. No sub-processor list was read (10 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency):

- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.
- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).
- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.
- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).

The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two.

Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts):

- Terms of service: published, but our reader couldn't read it (7 of 10)
- security.txt: could not be fetched (0 of 10)

## What we couldn't check

What we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.

- unchecked: www.entrust.com answered 403 to curl and to our reader on every page tried (product page, pricing, terms, the product privacy notice PDF, security.txt). The terms, privacy notice, pricing, sub-processors and security programme are unread. This may mean the listing should be held
- unchecked: documentation.identity.entrust.com/robots.txt answered 403, so its rules couldn't be read. The docs pages themselves answered normally
- Whether a new customer can sign up self-serve. dashboard.onfido.com/signup returns a JavaScript app with no readable content
- The G-Cloud 14 listing dates from 2024, so the price range and uptime figure may be out of date
- The spec repository tag v6.2.0 is dated 31 August 2026 while the npm and PyPI 6.2.0 releases date from May 2026
- No official MCP server. Two third-party Onfido servers are in the official MCP registry (io.github.codespar/mcp-onfido, io.usefulapi/onfido) and weren't graded

## Weaknesses

- entrust.com answered 403 to every request, so the terms, privacy notice, pricing page and security.txt weren't read
- No idempotency key on POST and no Retry-After header on 429
- The API release notes page has no entry after 27 February 2023
- A faulty deployment rejected valid tokens on the CA Public API for an hour on 7 September 2026
- Pricing is known only as a range of £0.43 to £2.12 a transaction from a 2024 UK G-Cloud listing

## What costs an agent a turn today

The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need.

- Use the regional host for the account (api.eu, api.us or api.ca.onfido.com/v3.6). v3.6 has no default region
- Prefer an OAuth client with only the scopes the task needs over a live API token, and refresh the 60-minute access token
- Stay under 400 requests a minute live and 120 in sandbox, and back off on a 429 `rate_limit` error
- Check before retrying a POST. There is no idempotency key, so a retry can create a second applicant or check
- Treat webhook events as duplicates or out of order, and verify `X-SHA2-Signature` over the raw body

## When it's done

Send what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `"kind": "dispute"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.