Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. When in the workflow there is the need to send an audit trail, instead of directly calling the method that creates the audit, the framework is invoked, by passing the message and the context (e.g., TLS, datetime) as parameters. The framework decides which evidence emitter to trigger
  2.  

Functional description

Why non-repudiation is needed? When NCPs exchange messages, they should produce enough evidence for further investigation in case of disputes. Here are some examples of the cases when this might be needed:

  1. In ePrescription, the patient returns to the home country and claims reimbursement of 3 packages of the drug purchased abroad. The dispensation only shows that 1 package was dispensed. The organization of NCP A now needs to prove that erroneous information was received from NCP B and was not generated while processing the dispensation information in the NCP or NI software. A similar case arises when the patient claims they only purchased 1 package out of 3, and there should be still some available amount on the prescription. The NCP A needs to show that the information received from NCP B was wrong.
  2. In Patient Summary, a drug is administered to the patient, and the patient suffers a severe allergic reaction. The allergy to the drug was mentioned on the patient summary, but the doctor claims that this information was not delivered and shown to them. Now NCP B wants to demonstrate that this information was indeed not received from Country A.

In these cases, the contents of the documents exchanged by the NCPs should be available for later examination during dispute resolution.

 

 

 

Panel

Related Meetings

Reference

[3] See e.g., epSOS D3.4.2, Section 4.5.6 Audit Trail Data for Non-Repudiation

...