API Entreprise makes administrative information available for procedures carried out by authorized public actors. A software provider can technically integrate the service for an administration, but it does not necessarily become a unrestricted recipient of the data. This distinction influences architecture, contracts, logs and user interfaces. Software sold to both public and private customers must prevent unauthorized users from accessing the data involved. Before promising a functionality, the software provider must therefore verify the use case, the holder of the authorisation and the exact role of each participant.
French framework for international readers
API Entreprise is a French government service that lets eligible public actors obtain administrative data for authorised procedures. Its brand should remain in French because a generic English rendering would suggest a general commercial interface. The administration carries the entitlement, while a software provider may operate the technical integration under defined conditions. International product teams should model this separation explicitly: customer eligibility, provider access, end-user permissions and logged purpose are different controls. Do not copy a French authorisation pattern to another country without checking that country’s source, mandate and recipient rules.
“Borders of an API Entreprise integration” control grid
- identified administrative procedure
- authorization carried by the public client
- agent recipients defined
- server-side isolated token
- logs without sensitive content
- negative tests for unauthorized profiles
Scenario: API Entreprise and DINUM
A software provider equips local authorities and private associations with the same product. The API Entreprise module is only activated after attaching an authorization provided by the local authority. Calls originate from an isolated server service and the data is only visible to agents authorized for the process. Support receives correlation IDs and technical errors, not the full response. An automatic test verifies that a private user or out-of-scope agent gets a denial and that no data is cached in a common area.
Alerts specific to authorization and public sector
- request global access on behalf of the software provider
- share a token between clients
- log complete responses
- activate the module for private users
Working method: Software-provider authorisation review
1. Describe the administrative process, the necessary data and the agents who will use them. A generic customer knowledge function is not a sufficient use case. To validate this step, note “administrative procedure identified”. The risk to avoid is: requesting global access in the name of the software provider.
2. Have eligibility checked by the client administration and let them submit the appropriate authorization request. The software provider does not reuse the token for other clients. To validate this step, note “authorization carried by the public client”. The risk to avoid is: sharing a token between clients.
3. Map the roles: responsible administration, recipient agents, software integrator, host and support. Indicate who can see the data and why. To validate this step, note “agent recipients defined”. The risk to avoid is: log the complete responses.
4. Design the server-side call, protect secrets and isolate authorizations. No tokens should be exposed in a browser or shared between processes. To validate this step, note “server side isolated token”. The risk to avoid is: activate the module for private users.
5. Limit display, logs and media to necessary data. Provider teams should not access default content to diagnose an incident. To validate this step, note “logs without sensitive content”. The risk to avoid is: requesting global access in the name of the software provider.
6. Test with authorized and non-authorized public profiles, then with a private client, to prove that the boundaries remain effective. To validate this step, note “negative tests for unauthorized profiles”. The risk to avoid is: sharing a token between clients.
Read the visual “Borders of an API Entreprise integration”
The visual grid uses the review labels “administrative authorization”, “isolated server”, “authorized agent”, “technical journal” and “private user denied”. Read the cards from left to right and then from top to bottom; no arrow connects them. They organise the topic’s checkpoints without depicting a decision tree or an automatic chronology, and their meaning does not depend on colour.
Limits of interpretation for API Entreprise
A successful technical integration does not prove the eligibility of the use case. A software provider's contract with a local authority does not automatically transfer authorization. A shared environment cannot expose data to private clients. Architecture risk: logs, backups or observability tools that capture responses expose data to the provider. Before production, the administration must determine with its data protection officer the roles, access, purposes and retention periods. Finally, the data obtained for a process must not be recycled for prospecting or commercial analysis.
Official reference for API Entreprise
The official FAQ indicates that API Entreprise is reserved for public actors with a public service mission and regulates the role of their service providers. It specifies that a software provider must let its public client submit the authorization request and that the service provider cannot become a recipient of the data on its own behalf. The sheet dedicated to software providers emphasizes the restriction of data to authorized users, particularly when the same software serves other audiences. The technical and contractual conditions must reflect this separation.
Instructions for using the “Software-provider authorisation review” tool
It checks the roles, approach, secrets and negative access tests. The entries are: public client, approach, necessary data, recipients, architecture, logs. The expected output is an access matrix and the blocking conditions before integration. The safeguards are explicit: no shared tokens; no front-end data; no secondary commercial use. When an input is unknown, the tool flags the missing evidence instead of choosing the most favourable outcome.
Decision and operational handoff
Develop integration when the administration is eligible, the approach and recipients are validated and the architecture prevents any secondary use. If the software provider must see the data to operate the service, have this role clarified before going into production. Refuse requests that aim to enrich a general commercial product or reuse responses outside the authorized process.
Official sources checked for API Entreprise
Continue in Propecto
Source éditoriale : Propecto. Date de publication : 2026-08-17. Lorsqu'une donnée vient d'une source externe, sa référence est citée dans le corps de l'article.