Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which companies have worked on digital ID projects for governments in the past 5 years?
Executive summary
Multiple private-sector technology and services companies have worked on government digital ID projects in the past five years, with specific contract awards and vendor involvement cited for WidePoint, Net Group, KOMSCO (Korea’s state printer), Fujitsu, and a wider ecosystem of 58 certified verifiers in the UK context [1] [2] [3]. Reporting also shows broad government engagement—US federal and state pilots and UK national plans—creating many potential contractor roles rather than a single supplier market [4] [5].
1. Who appears on contract announcements: named vendors and deals
Trade coverage highlights particular contract wins: WidePoint Corporation secured a six‑year Personal Identity Verification–Interoperable (PIV‑I) credentialing contract with the U.S. Department of Education starting August 2025 [1]. Separate industry reports list Net Group winning public‑sector digital ID work in Estonia and Korea’s state printer (KOMSCO) getting contracts to support digital identity rollouts in places like Costa Rica [2]. Fujitsu is named as an expected winner for part of the UK’s national digital ID card despite reputational and procurement controversies [2].
2. Large vendor pools and certification systems expand contractor lists
Beyond headline contracts, the UK’s Office for Digital Identities and Attributes (OfDIA) and the trust framework mean a broad supply base: a Computer Weekly analysis counted 58 organisations capable of providing digital verification services for right‑to‑work, right‑to‑rent and background checks as of April 2025 [3]. The House of Commons Library notes that only providers certified against the statutory trust framework may access government data for verification—creating an official list of eligible private suppliers rather than ad‑hoc contracting [6].
3. Government pilots and federal/state projects create many contractor roles
In the United States, the digital ID landscape is described as evolving through state and federal pilots (mobile driver’s licenses, TSA trials using Apple/Google Wallet), which implicitly involve technology vendors, integrators and wallet platform partners to achieve interoperability at airports and agencies [4]. Analyses and policy pieces (ITIF and Federal News Network) outline guidelines and implementation pathways, implying that a range of private firms (identity proofing, credentialing, platform vendors) have been engaged during this period [7] [8].
4. Where reporting is specific versus where it’s broad or silent
Sources explicitly name WidePoint, Net Group, KOMSCO and Fujitsu in recent contract reporting [1] [2]. Other coverage is broader: the UK materials reference 58 capable organisations and the statutory trust framework without listing all firms, so detailed rosters of every company engaged across governments are not published in these pieces [3] [6]. Available sources do not mention a comprehensive global list of all companies that worked on government digital ID projects in the past five years.
5. Policy and procurement context that shapes vendor roles
UK reporting emphasizes that the Government Digital Service and DSIT will be central to design and delivery, while the trust framework sets certification boundaries—this drives procurement toward suppliers that can meet specific privacy, interoperability and security criteria [9] [6]. In the U.S., evolving federal guidance and state‑level mDL programs have pushed interoperability pilots that require vendor participation across biometric, wallet and verification stacks [7] [4].
6. Risks, controversies and reputational factors influencing suppliers
Coverage flags security and delivery concerns tied to contractor work: BBC reporting cited a 2022 incident where One Login development involved contractors working on unsecured workstations in Romania, raising questions about supplier controls and clearance processes [10]. Fujitsu’s potential UK role is reported alongside reminders of earlier scandals affecting its willingness to bid, showing reputational issues can influence procurement outcomes [2].
7. What this means for someone tracking who’s involved
If you want a near‑complete picture of contractors, combine (a) contract announcements like WidePoint’s, Net Group’s and KOMSCO’s [1] [2], (b) official supplier‑certification lists maintained under national trust frameworks (UK OfDIA / DIATF) that show the 58 capable organisations mentioned [3] [6], and (c) procurement notices and agency RFIs tied to state/federal pilots in the U.S. [4] [7]. Available sources do not provide a single consolidated database of every company across all governments.
Limitations and next steps: reporting in these sources names a handful of firms and describes structural programs and certification regimes, but does not publish an exhaustive global roster of vendors; to build one you would need to aggregate procurement records and certified‑provider lists from each government [1] [3] [6].