Internet-Draft JEP Receipt Profile September 2026
Wang Expires 30 March 2027 [Page]
Workgroup:
Network Working Group
Internet-Draft:
draft-wang-jep-receipt-profile-00
Published:
Intended Status:
Experimental
Expires:
Author:
Y. Wang

JEP Receipt Profile: Verifiable Behavior and Evidence Receipts

Abstract

This document defines JEP Receipt Profile 1 (JEP-RP-1), a minimal receipt and evidence profile for the Judgment Event Protocol (JEP) [JEP].

JEP-RP-1 binds a JEP event to one digest-addressed receipt record through a critical JEP extension. It defines a small behavior-record format, portable receipt manifests and bundles, and independent receipt-validation checks. JEP remains authoritative for event verbs, Event Identity, Event Hash, signature processing, references, extension processing, validation modes, and acceptance semantics.

Receipt records are technical evidence about observable behavior and related artifacts. JEP-RP-1 does not assign legal liability, prove subjective intent, establish authorization validity, determine causality or factual truth, define governance outcomes, or establish regulatory compliance.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 30 March 2027.

▲

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

AI agents and automated services increasingly act across platforms, organizations, tools, and jurisdictions. Operators, counterparties, auditors, and downstream systems may need a portable record showing that a specific JEP event was cryptographically bound to a specific behavior or receipt record.

JEP-RP-1 provides that receipt layer.

The narrow profile question is:

Which JEP event was signed,
which receipt record was bound to it,
and can that binding be independently revalidated?

The profile deliberately does not answer whether the recorded action was correct, authorized, fair, lawful, causally complete, or sufficient for an external policy.

JEP Profiles [JEP-PROFILES] defines the general profile-selection and composition model. JEP Conformance [JEP-CONFORMANCE] defines executable Core validation-result and test-harness conventions used by Receipt Profile implementations.

Earlier work used the technical name HJS in draft-wang-hjs-accountability. This document uses a new Internet-Draft filename and is intended to replace that draft series. The protocol component name is JEP Receipt Profile. Organizational names are outside the protocol namespace.

Where this document conflicts with JEP-Core, JEP-Core controls.

2. Requirements Language

The key words MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, NOT RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals.

3. Scope and Layering

3.1. JEP-RP-1 Defines

JEP-RP-1 defines:

  • one explicit Receipt Profile identifier;
  • one critical receipt-binding extension;
  • one minimal behavior-record format;
  • one receipt-manifest format;
  • receipt-bundle packaging semantics;
  • independent receipt-validation checks;
  • privacy and non-inference requirements.

3.2. JEP-RP-1 Does Not Define

JEP-RP-1 does not define:

  • new JEP verbs;
  • an independent signature format;
  • a replacement for Event Identity or Event Hash;
  • chain causality or complete-log semantics;
  • authorization or delegation validity;
  • legal liability, fault, intent, negligence, consent, fairness, or harm;
  • regulatory compliance;
  • monitoring duties, sanctions, remedies, or appeal rights;
  • a global identity or trust framework;
  • a mandatory archive format;
  • a global model, tool, risk, or policy taxonomy.

3.3. JEP Ownership

JEP-Core is authoritative for:

  • J, D, T, and V semantics;
  • required Core event fields;
  • Event Identity (who,id);
  • Event Hash;
  • the JEP Signing Payload;
  • signature processing;
  • ref;
  • ext and ext_crit;
  • independent Core validation checks;
  • validation modes;
  • acceptance outcomes and idempotent acceptance.

JEP-RP-1 MUST NOT redefine those semantics.

3.4. Actor, Signer, and Observed Agent

JEP-RP-1 distinguishes three concepts:

  • JEP actor: the actor claimed by the JEP who field;
  • signer: the key holder that produced the JEP signature;
  • observed agent: the AI agent, runtime, service, or automated component described by the behavior record.

These MAY refer to the same entity, but JEP-RP-1 MUST NOT assume that they do.

Actor/key binding is determined by the selected trust profile.

The observed-agent identifier is evidence content. It does not establish that the observed agent controlled the signing key or emitted the JEP event.

4. Profile and Extension Identifiers

4.1. Receipt Profile Identifier

The JEP-RP-1 profile identifier is:

https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1

The human-readable label JEP-RP-1 MAY be used in documentation and user interfaces.

The profile identifier is a publisher-controlled HTTPS URI. Dereferencing it is not required for validation. The publisher SHOULD keep the URI stable and SHOULD make profile documentation available there when practical.

4.2. Receipt-Binding Extension Identifier

The JEP-RP-1 receipt-binding extension identifier is:

https://humanjudgment.org/jep/extensions/receipt-binding/1

An event claiming JEP-RP-1 conformance MUST carry this extension under JEP ext and MUST list the identifier in ext_crit.

A verifier that does not understand this critical extension cannot claim successful JEP-RP-1 validation.

4.3. Version and Naming Boundary

JEP-RP-1 is not wire-compatible with the HJS-Core-1 binding model used by draft-wang-hjs-accountability-05.

HJS-Core-1 commonly placed an external record digest in JEP what. That model is not a valid generic binding rule for JEP-Core 0.7 because D, T, and V have verb-specific required what members.

JEP-RP-1 therefore moves receipt binding into a critical JEP extension and leaves Core what semantics entirely under JEP-Core.

Historical HJS-Core-1 receipts MUST NOT be silently rewritten as JEP-RP-1 receipts.

5. Receipt Event Model

5.1. Receipt Event

A JEP-RP-1 Receipt Event is a JEP-Core event that:

  • validates under the requested JEP validation mode and selected profiles;
  • carries the JEP-RP-1 receipt-binding extension;
  • lists that extension in ext_crit;
  • binds exactly one primary receipt record by digest.

The underlying JEP verb remains authoritative.

5.2. Use of J, D, T, and V

JEP-RP-1 does not assign new meanings to J, D, T, or V.

A producer MUST satisfy the JEP-Core requirements for the selected verb before receipt binding is considered.

In particular:

  • a D event MUST retain the Core D what.delegatee and what.scope semantics;
  • a T event MUST retain the Core T what.termination_scope and ref semantics;
  • a V event MUST retain the Core V what.verification_scope, what.result, and ref semantics.

Receipt metadata MUST NOT replace those Core fields.

5.3. who

The JEP who field identifies the actor claimed by the Receipt Event.

JEP-RP-1 MUST NOT describe who as a verified signer identity unless the applicable actor-binding check actually passed.

who SHOULD NOT contain plaintext personal information unless the deployment requires that form and has an appropriate privacy basis.

5.4. ref

JEP-RP-1 uses JEP ref exactly as defined by JEP-Core.

A logical reference to another JEP event SHOULD use Event Identity. An optional Event Hash MAY pin an exact signed artifact.

JEP-RP-1 MUST NOT use Event Hash as a substitute for stable Event Identity when the reference is logically about an event.

The presence of a JEP reference does not establish causality, completeness, authorization, endorsement, or legal effect.

6. Receipt-Binding Extension

6.1. Extension Value

The receipt-binding extension value MUST be a JSON object containing:

  • profile
  • record_type
  • record_digest
  • media_type

profile MUST equal https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1.

record_type MUST be one of:

  • behavior
  • receipt-manifest

record_digest MUST be an algorithm-tagged digest string conforming to the JEP digest-string rules.

media_type MUST be a non-empty string. JEP-RP-1 JSON records use application/json.

The extension MAY additionally contain record_uri. If present, record_uri is a retrieval hint only. Validation MUST NOT depend solely on trusting the retrieved location.

6.2. Extension Example 

{
  "ext": {
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/extensions/receipt-binding/1": {
      "profile": "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1",
      "record_type": "behavior",
      "record_digest": "sha256:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa",
      "media_type": "application/json"
    }
  },
  "ext_crit": [
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/extensions/receipt-binding/1"
  ]
}

The example digest is illustrative and is not a test vector.

6.3. One Primary Record

Each JEP-RP-1 Receipt Event binds exactly one primary receipt record through the receipt extension.

Additional evidence objects are referenced from that primary record or a receipt manifest. This rule avoids ambiguity about which object the Receipt Event primarily authenticates.

7. Behavior Records

7.1. Required Shape

A JEP-RP-1 behavior record MUST be a JSON object containing:

  • jep_receipt_record
  • record_type
  • agent
  • action
  • created_at
  • evidence

jep_receipt_record MUST equal "1".

record_type MUST equal "behavior".

agent MUST be a JSON object containing a non-empty string id. agent.role and agent.deployment_id MAY be present as non-empty strings.

action MUST be a JSON object containing a non-empty string type. Additional action fields are deployment-defined.

created_at MUST be a non-negative integer representing declared Unix seconds for record creation. It is not trusted time or proof of freshness.

evidence MUST be a JSON array of zero or more Evidence Descriptors.

The record MAY additionally contain:

  • human_participants
  • context
  • redaction

No other top-level members are defined by JEP-RP-1. Additional structured content SHOULD be placed in evidence objects or defined by an explicitly selected companion profile.

7.2. Evidence Descriptor

An Evidence Descriptor MUST be a JSON object containing:

kind MUST be a non-empty string describing the evidence class.

digest MUST be an algorithm-tagged digest string.

An Evidence Descriptor MAY additionally contain:

  • media_type
  • uri
  • redaction

media_type, when present, MUST be a non-empty string.

uri, when present, is a retrieval hint. A verifier MUST NOT treat URI dereference success as evidence-integrity success.

redaction, when present, SHOULD be one of:

  • none
  • partial
  • digest-only
  • withheld

A companion profile MAY define additional redaction values.

7.3. Human Participant Reference

human_participants, when present, MUST be an array of structured references.

Each reference MUST contain:

  • role
  • reference_type

role and reference_type MUST be non-empty strings.

If reference_type is not withheld, the object MUST contain reference.

If reference_type is withheld, reference MUST be absent.

A reference MAY contain privacy_mode and salt_holder.

JEP-RP-1 does not guarantee anonymity or unlinkability. Timing, metadata, content similarity, device identifiers, storage locations, or salt reuse can create linkability.

7.4. Context and Redaction

context, when present, MUST be a JSON object whose semantics are defined by the deployment or companion profile.

redaction, when present, MUST be a JSON object describing minimization or redaction applied to the behavior record or its referenced evidence.

The presence of a redaction descriptor does not prove that redaction was legally required, sufficient, complete, or correctly performed.

7.5. Behavior Record Digest

For JEP-RP-1, the Behavior Record Digest uses JCS [RFC8785] and is:

sha256(UTF8(JCS(behavior_record)))

The textual digest is represented as a JEP algorithm-tagged digest string.

JEP-RP-1 producers and verifiers MUST support sha256 for behavior-record digests.

A companion profile MAY permit additional digest algorithms but MUST NOT change the meaning of the JEP-RP-1 baseline digest.

A behavior record MUST NOT embed the Event Hash of the JEP event that binds it, because doing so would create a circular artifact dependency.

8. Receipt Manifests

8.1. Manifest Shape

A JEP-RP-1 receipt manifest MUST be a JSON object containing:

  • jep_receipt_manifest
  • profile
  • root_event
  • events
  • records
  • created_at

jep_receipt_manifest MUST equal "1".

profile MUST equal https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1.

root_event MUST be an Event Descriptor.

events MUST be a non-empty array of Event Descriptors.

records MUST be a non-empty array of Record Descriptors.

created_at MUST be a non-negative integer representing declared Unix seconds for manifest creation. It is not trusted time.

A receipt manifest MAY additionally contain:

  • external_refs
  • redaction

8.2. Event Descriptor

An Event Descriptor MUST contain event_identity:

{
  "event_identity": {
    "who": "did:example:agent-123",
    "id": "urn:uuid:018f4f8d-7c63-7c2e-9b43-4ef657eec1c0"
  }
}

event_identity.who and event_identity.id MUST be non-empty strings.

An Event Descriptor MAY additionally contain:

  • event_hash
  • uri

event_hash, when present, pins one exact signed event artifact.

uri, when present, is only a retrieval hint.

Every Event Identity in events MUST be unique within the manifest.

root_event.event_identity MUST equal one Event Identity listed in events.

If root_event.event_hash is present, it MUST equal the Event Hash for the corresponding exact signed artifact, except as prohibited by Section 8.4.

8.3. Record Descriptor

A Record Descriptor MUST contain:

  • record_type
  • digest

record_type MUST be a non-empty string.

digest MUST be an algorithm-tagged digest string.

A Record Descriptor MAY additionally contain:

  • media_type
  • uri

The digest, not the URI, is the integrity identity of the record.

8.4. Binding-Event Circularity Rule

If a JEP Receipt Event binds a receipt manifest as its primary record, that manifest MUST identify the binding event by Event Identity and MUST NOT include the binding event's Event Hash anywhere in the manifest.

This rule applies to both root_event and any corresponding entry in events.

The manifest MAY include Event Hash values for other JEP events.

A verifier MUST reject a manifest that includes the binding event's Event Hash, because the binding Event Hash depends on the signed extension containing the manifest digest and would create a circular artifact dependency.

8.5. Manifest Digest

A JSON receipt manifest is digest-addressed using:

sha256(UTF8(JCS(receipt_manifest)))

A Receipt Event MAY bind a receipt manifest as its primary record by using record_type equal to receipt-manifest in the receipt-binding extension.

9. Receipt Bundles and Export

9.1. Bundle

A JEP receipt bundle is a packaging concept containing zero or more:

  • signed JEP events;
  • behavior records;
  • receipt manifests;
  • validation reports;
  • external evidence objects.

JEP-RP-1 does not define a validation-report primary record type. Validation reports MAY appear as bundle artifacts, but their structure and semantics are outside the JEP-RP-1 baseline.

JEP-RP-1 does not define a mandatory ZIP, CBOR, JSON, archive, transport, or storage container.

Packaging MUST NOT alter signed JEP event bytes or misrepresent digest-bound record content.

9.2. Partial and Redacted Export

A bundle MAY contain only a subset of available evidence.

A partial or redacted export MUST NOT present omitted material as nonexistent, unchanged, irrelevant, agreed, waived, or verified.

Where omission could affect interpretation, the export SHOULD include an explicit withheld, redacted, or partial-view indication.

9.3. No Chain Inference

A bundle containing multiple events is not, merely by being a bundle, a causal chain, responsibility chain, authorization chain, or complete event history.

Chain reconstruction, cycle analysis, termination cascade, complete-log assumptions, and causal interpretation belong to a selected chain profile or external system.

10. Receipt Validation

10.1. Layer Separation

Receipt validation reports separately:

  • JEP-Core validation status;
  • Receipt Profile checks;
  • Receipt Profile overall status.

JEP-RP-1 MUST NOT replace or overwrite the underlying JEP validation result.

10.2. Baseline Validation Mode

A JEP-RP-1 Verifier MUST support JEP archival validation mode.

If no JEP validation mode is explicitly requested, receipt validation MUST use archival mode.

Archival receipt validation MUST NOT consume JEP acceptance state.

A deployment MAY additionally request acceptance, chain, or policy mode when those semantics are required. Those modes remain JEP modes and MUST NOT be redefined by this profile.

10.3. Receipt Profile Checks

The initial JEP-RP-1 check identifiers are:

  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#profile-binding
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#receipt-extension
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#record-binding
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#record-structure
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#manifest-structure
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#bundle-integrity
  • https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#privacy-reference-format

Check statuses use the JEP conformance vocabulary:

  • pass
  • fail
  • not_checked
  • not_applicable
  • unsupported
  • indeterminate

A verifier MUST NOT report an unperformed Receipt Profile check as pass.

10.4. Receipt Profile Overall Status

The Receipt Profile overall status is one of:

  • valid
  • invalid
  • indeterminate

For the requested Receipt Profile validation context:

  • invalid means the underlying required JEP validation is invalid or at least one required Receipt Profile check failed;
  • indeterminate means no required check failed, but the underlying required JEP validation is indeterminate or at least one required Receipt Profile check is unsupported, not checked, or indeterminate;
  • valid means the underlying required JEP validation is valid and every required Receipt Profile check passed or was not applicable.

10.5. Validation Procedure

A verifier SHOULD:

  • validate the JEP event under the requested JEP mode and selected profiles;
  • verify that the receipt extension is present and listed in ext_crit;
  • verify that the extension profile equals the JEP-RP-1 profile identifier;
  • obtain the primary receipt record;
  • canonicalize and hash the record according to the applicable Receipt Profile record rules;
  • compare the recomputed digest with record_digest;
  • validate the record structure for the declared record_type;
  • if a manifest is the bound primary record, enforce the binding-event circularity rule in Section 8.4;
  • if a manifest or bundle is evaluated, verify Event Identity and optional Event Hash bindings independently;
  • verify all required external evidence digests that are available in the requested validation context;
  • return the JEP result, Receipt Profile check results, and Receipt Profile overall status separately.

A successful Receipt Profile result proves the checked cryptographic and structural bindings. It does not prove the external truth or completeness of the recorded behavior.

10.6. Receipt Validation Result Example 

{
  "receipt_status": "valid",
  "profile": "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1",
  "jep": {
    "status": "valid",
    "mode": "archival",
    "event_identity": {
      "who": "did:example:receipt-service",
      "id": "urn:uuid:018f4f8d-7c63-7c2e-9b43-4ef657eec1c0"
    },
    "event_hash": "sha256:bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb"
  },
  "checks": {
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#profile-binding": "pass",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#receipt-extension": "pass",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#record-binding": "pass",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#record-structure": "pass",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#manifest-structure": "not_applicable",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#bundle-integrity": "not_applicable",
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1#privacy-reference-format": "not_applicable"
  },
  "record": {
    "record_type": "behavior",
    "record_digest": "sha256:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"
  },
  "warnings": [],
  "errors": []
}

The example is illustrative and is not a test vector.

11. Verification Events

A JEP V event MAY record a Receipt Profile evaluation.

The V event MUST satisfy JEP-Core V requirements.

JEP-RP-1 defines the following provisional profile-specific verification scopes:

A V event MUST identify its target through JEP ref.

A V event's what.result reports the semantic result of its declared verification scope. It MUST NOT be confused with the independent per-check status vocabulary used by a Receipt Profile verifier.

A V event MUST NOT imply evaluation beyond its declared scope.

12. Conformance

12.1. JEP-RP-1 Producer

A conforming JEP-RP-1 Producer MUST:

  • produce a JEP event conforming to the applicable JEP Producer requirements;
  • preserve the selected JEP verb semantics;
  • include the receipt-binding extension;
  • list the extension in ext_crit;
  • use the JEP-RP-1 profile identifier;
  • bind exactly one primary receipt record by digest;
  • produce the bound record according to the applicable Receipt Profile record format;
  • avoid rewriting Event Identity or Event Hash semantics.

12.2. JEP-RP-1 Verifier

A conforming JEP-RP-1 Verifier MUST:

  • perform or consume an actual JEP validation result;
  • support JEP archival validation mode;
  • process the critical receipt extension;
  • support JEP-RP-1 behavior-record and manifest digest calculation;
  • support the required Receipt Profile checks for its claimed validation context;
  • preserve independent check statuses;
  • distinguish Event Identity from Event Hash;
  • distinguish JEP validity from Receipt Profile validity;
  • enforce the binding-event circularity rule for bound manifests;
  • return indeterminate rather than success when a required check cannot be completed.

12.3. Receipt Bundle Verifier

An implementation claiming Receipt Bundle Verifier capability MUST additionally:

  • validate manifest structure when a manifest is present;
  • verify Event Identity descriptors;
  • verify every required Event Hash pin;
  • verify every required record digest for available records;
  • report missing required bundle components as failure or indeterminate according to the requested validation context;
  • avoid inferring causal-chain completeness from bundle membership.

13. Security Considerations

A valid JEP-RP-1 receipt does not prove that the described behavior actually occurred as represented. It proves only the properties that were actually validated.

Implementations MUST consider:

A verifier MUST compare the recomputed primary-record digest with the digest inside the signed critical receipt extension.

A verifier MUST enforce Section 8.4 when a Receipt Event binds a receipt manifest.

A verifier MUST NOT claim actor binding unless the applicable trust-profile check passed.

A verifier MUST NOT infer authorization, causality, truth, completeness, liability, or policy compliance from successful Receipt Profile structural validation.

14. Privacy Considerations

Receipt records can expose:

Implementations SHOULD minimize plaintext personal data.

Human participant references SHOULD use opaque, pseudonymous, rotating, digest-only, or withheld representations when direct identity is unnecessary.

Digest-based references can still enable correlation or dictionary attacks, especially when the underlying value has low entropy.

A receipt bundle SHOULD disclose only the evidence required for its intended validation purpose.

Receipt Profile privacy mechanisms do not themselves establish consent, lawful basis, data-subject rights compliance, confidentiality obligations, or entitlement to disclosure.

15. Non-Inference Boundary

JEP-RP-1 is a technical receipt profile.

A successful Receipt Profile validation MUST NOT be presented, by itself, as proof:

External profiles and policies MAY use receipt evidence when making such determinations, but those conclusions remain external to JEP-RP-1.

16. IANA Considerations

This document requests no IANA actions.

The JEP-RP-1 profile identifier, receipt-extension identifier, Receipt Profile check identifiers, and Receipt Profile verification-scope identifiers defined by this document are publisher-controlled HTTPS URI identifiers.

Future specifications MAY define registries if stable interoperable deployment requires them.

17. Examples

17.1. Behavior Record 

{
  "jep_receipt_record": "1",
  "record_type": "behavior",
  "agent": {
    "id": "did:example:agent-789",
    "role": "planner",
    "deployment_id": "runtime-42"
  },
  "action": {
    "type": "tool_call",
    "name": "calendar.create_event"
  },
  "created_at": 1790424000,
  "evidence": [
    {
      "kind": "tool_request",
      "digest": "sha256:1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111",
      "media_type": "application/json",
      "redaction": "digest-only"
    },
    {
      "kind": "tool_response",
      "digest": "sha256:2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222",
      "media_type": "application/json",
      "redaction": "partial"
    }
  ]
}

17.2. J Event Carrying a Receipt Binding 

{
  "jep": "1",
  "id": "urn:uuid:018f4f8d-7c63-7c2e-9b43-4ef657eec1c0",
  "verb": "J",
  "who": "did:example:receipt-service",
  "when": 1790424000,
  "what": {
    "claim": "agent-behavior-recorded"
  },
  "ext": {
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/extensions/receipt-binding/1": {
      "profile": "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1",
      "record_type": "behavior",
      "record_digest": "sha256:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa",
      "media_type": "application/json"
    }
  },
  "ext_crit": [
    "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/extensions/receipt-binding/1"
  ],
  "sig": "..."
}

The J what object remains a JEP-Core judgment claim. The receipt-record binding is carried only in the critical receipt extension.

17.3. Receipt Manifest 

{
  "jep_receipt_manifest": "1",
  "profile": "https://humanjudgment.org/jep/profiles/receipt/1",
  "root_event": {
    "event_identity": {
      "who": "did:example:receipt-service",
      "id": "urn:uuid:018f4f8d-7c63-7c2e-9b43-4ef657eec1c0"
    }
  },
  "events": [
    {
      "event_identity": {
        "who": "did:example:receipt-service",
        "id": "urn:uuid:018f4f8d-7c63-7c2e-9b43-4ef657eec1c0"
      }
    }
  ],
  "records": [
    {
      "record_type": "behavior",
      "digest": "sha256:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa",
      "media_type": "application/json"
    }
  ],
  "created_at": 1790424010
}

This example is suitable for a manifest that is itself bound by the root Receipt Event; therefore the binding event is identified by Event Identity without its Event Hash, avoiding a circular dependency.

18. Transition from HJS-05

This Internet-Draft is intended to replace draft-wang-hjs-accountability. The following summarizes the technical transition from draft-wang-hjs-accountability-05:

19. References

19.1. Normative References

[JEP]
Wang, Y., "Judgment Event Protocol (JEP)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-wang-jep-judgment-event-protocol-07, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-jep-judgment-event-protocol-07>.
[JEP-CONFORMANCE]
Wang, Y., "JEP Conformance and Test Suite", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-wang-jep-conformance-01, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-jep-conformance-01>.
[JEP-PROFILES]
Wang, Y., "JEP Profiles and Interoperability", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-wang-jep-profiles-01, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wang-jep-profiles-01>.
[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.
[RFC8785]
Rundgren, A., Jordan, B., and S. Erlandsson, "JSON Canonicalization Scheme (JCS)", RFC 8785, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8785>.

Author's Address

Yuqiang Wang
URI: https://github.com/hjs-spec