Solidus Auth
Solidus Auth vs Clerk
Solidus's argument is standards compliance and credential portability that Clerk structurally doesn't have, not a better sign-up form.
Solidus nerede farklılaşıyor
- Zero W3C compliance: the brief states Clerk has 'zero decentralization, zero portability, zero standards compliance (no W3C DID/VC)' — Solidus ships OID4VP + Solid-OIDC on a W3C-registered DID method.
- Clerk holds all user PII centrally — the brief calls it 'a honeypot data store' and flags a breach or EU DPA action as 'an existential event.' Solidus's architecture keeps PII out of its own infrastructure — a design claim, not an audited guarantee.
- No cross-app portability: Clerk users are 'trapped per-application' per the brief; a did:solidus credential is portable across apps in principle.
Yan yana
| Özellik | Solidus | Clerk |
|---|---|---|
| What it actually is | Testnet-anchored OID4VP verifier + Solid-OIDC/DPoP provider | Full-stack auth-as-a-service — UI components, sessions, MFA, org + billing management |
| Pricing at scale | $0.001/verification protocol cost, no MAU floor | $0.02/MAU at scale (free tier: 50K MRUs) |
| Where the user's identity lives | With the user — a W3C VC they hold | Centrally, in Clerk's identity store |
| W3C DID / VC standards | OID4VP + Solid-OIDC on did:solidus (W3C-registered) | None — brief: 'no W3C DID/VC' |
| Cross-app credential portability | did:solidus — W3C-registered, portable in principle | Per-app; brief: users 'trapped per-application' |
Kendiniz kontrol edin
npm i @solidus-network/auth @solidus-network/bbs — the BBS+ unlinkability demo ships in the tarball.