Current identity systems are binary: You either prove everything (full KYC) or prove nothing (pseudonymous wallet). This creates privacy leaks and operational friction for protocols like Aave and Compound that require compliance.
zero-knowledge-privacy-identity-and-compliance
Blog
The Future of Consent: ZK Proofs for Selective Disclosure
Users are moving from oversharing personal data to proving specific claims with zero-knowledge proofs. This analysis explores how protocols like Polygon ID and Sismo are enabling privacy-first authentication, the technical trade-offs, and the inevitable regulatory collision.
introduction
THE ZK IDENTITY SHIFT
Introduction
Zero-knowledge proofs are redefining digital consent by enabling selective data disclosure, moving us from all-or-nothing authentication to granular, verifiable claims.
ZK proofs enable predicate-based access: A user proves they are over 18 or accredited without revealing their birthdate or tax ID. This granularity is the core innovation of privacy-preserving identity.
The shift is from data to proof: Instead of submitting a document, you submit a cryptographic attestation. Projects like Sismo and Polygon ID are building the infrastructure for this, using verifiable credentials.
Evidence: The EU's eIDAS 2.0 regulation mandates digital wallets with selective disclosure, creating a multi-billion dollar market for ZK-based identity solutions by 2030.
thesis-statement
THE ZK IDENTITY PRIMITIVE
Thesis Statement
Zero-knowledge proofs will become the foundational primitive for user-centric digital identity, enabling selective data disclosure without centralized intermediaries.
ZK proofs invert data control. They shift the power dynamic from platforms holding user data to users proving statements about it, enabling self-sovereign identity models like Verifiable Credentials.
The future is selective disclosure. Users prove attributes (e.g., 'over 21', 'KYC'd by Coinbase') without revealing underlying data, a concept core to projects like Sismo's ZK Badges and Polygon ID.
This kills the data honeypot. Centralized databases of PII become obsolete attack surfaces, replaced by user-held cryptographic attestations verified on-chain or off-chain.
Evidence: The Worldcoin protocol uses ZK proofs to verify unique humanness without biometric data, processing millions of verifications as a foundational identity layer.
market-context
THE FUTURE OF CONSENT
The Data Dump is Dead
Zero-Knowledge Proofs enable selective data disclosure, replacing the all-or-nothing privacy model of Web2.
ZK Proofs enable selective disclosure. Users prove specific claims without revealing the underlying data, ending the practice of surrendering raw credentials for access.
This inverts the data ownership model. Instead of platforms hoarding personal data, users cryptographically control what they share, minimizing exposure to breaches and surveillance.
The standard is emerging via zk-SNARKs and zk-STARKs. Protocols like Sismo and Polygon ID use these proofs to create portable, verifiable credentials for Web3 logins and DeFi.
Evidence: The EU's eIDAS 2.0 regulation mandates digital wallets, creating a multi-billion dollar market for ZK-based identity solutions that comply by design.
key-trends
FROM BINARY TO GRANULAR
Key Trends Driving Selective Disclosure
The all-or-nothing data sharing model is breaking. Zero-Knowledge Proofs enable users to prove specific claims without revealing the underlying data, creating a new paradigm for digital identity and compliance.
01
The Problem: KYC/AML's Data Firehose
Traditional compliance requires handing over your entire identity document. This creates massive honeypots for hackers and strips user control.
- Risk: Centralized data silos are prime targets for breaches.
- Inefficiency: Re-verification is required for every new service.
- Overexposure: Proves age 21+ by revealing your full name, address, and DOB.
~90%
Excess Data
1000+
Attack Vectors
02
The Solution: ZK-Attested Claims
Projects like Sismo and Polygon ID use ZKPs to mint verifiable credentials. A user proves citizenship or age once to a trusted issuer, then can generate ZK proofs for dApps.
- Selective: Prove you're a accredited investor without revealing net worth.
- Portable: Credentials are self-sovereign and chain-agnostic.
- Compliant: Audit trails for issuers, privacy for users.
0 KB
Raw Data Leaked
<1s
Proof Gen
03
The Catalyst: DeFi's Regulatory Pressure
Regulatory scrutiny on DeFi (MiCA, FATF Travel Rule) forces protocols to implement compliance. ZK-based solutions are the only way to satisfy regulators without betraying crypto's privacy ethos.
- Entity: Protocols like Aave and Circle are exploring ZK KYC.
- Shift: Moves risk from user-data storage to proof validity.
- Network Effect: A standard ZK credential becomes a composable primitive.
$10B+
TVL at Stake
100%
Audit Trail
04
The Architecture: On-Chain Proof, Off-Chain Data
Frameworks like zkPass and TLSNotary allow proving statements about any HTTPS-accessible data (bank balance, social score). The data never leaves your device.
- Scope: Expands use cases beyond blockchain-native data.
- Trust Model: Relies on TLS/SSL security, not new assumptions.
- UX: User signs a message; a zk-SNARK is generated and posted on-chain.
Any Website
Data Source
~2s
Verification
05
The Bottleneck: Proof Generation Cost & Speed
Creating a ZKP for complex claims (e.g., credit score > 700) is computationally intensive. This impacts mobile UX and scalability.
- Hardware: Requires efficient proving systems like RISC Zero or SP1.
- Innovation: Parallelization and GPU proving are critical paths.
- Metric: Target is sub-second proof generation on a smartphone.
10-100x
Faster Needed
<$0.01
Target Cost
06
The Endgame: Programmable Privacy as a Primitive
Selective disclosure isn't a feature—it's a new base layer. It enables private DeFi (e.g., lending with hidden collateral), sybil-resistant governance, and ad-supported web3 without surveillance.
- Composability: ZK proofs become inputs for smart contracts.
- Market: Creates a new design space for application logic.
- Shift: From identity verification to attribute-based access control.
New Design Space
For dApps
100M+
Potential Users
deep-dive
THE FUTURE OF CONSENT
How It Actually Works: The ZK Stack for Identity
Zero-knowledge proofs enable verifiable credentials that reveal only the specific data required for a transaction, moving beyond all-or-nothing data dumps.
Selective disclosure is the core primitive. A ZK proof verifies a credential's validity without exposing its raw data, enabling users to prove they are over 21 without revealing their birthdate or driver's license number.
The stack separates issuance from verification. Projects like Sismo and Verax issue attestations on-chain, while verifiers check proofs against public circuits. This creates a trust-minimized data layer independent of any single issuer.
This flips the KYC model. Instead of sending your passport to every exchange, you get one zkKYC attestation from a provider like Veriff or Persona. You then generate a unique proof for each platform, minimizing data leakage.
Evidence: Polygon ID's zkKYC solution reduces the data shared in a compliance check from ~100 fields to a single proof, cutting verification gas costs by over 90%.
ZK PROOFS FOR SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE
Protocol Landscape: A Comparative Snapshot
Comparison of leading approaches enabling users to prove specific statements about private data without revealing the underlying data.
| Core Feature / Metric | zk-SNARKs (e.g., Zcash, Tornado Cash) | zk-STARKs (e.g., StarkEx, StarkNet) | ZKML / Custom Circuits (e.g., RISC Zero, EZKL) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Use Case | Private payments, identity attestation | Scalable computation, high-volume DEX | Proving arbitrary program execution (ML, games) |
Proof Size | ~200 bytes | ~45-200 KB | Varies by program complexity |
Trusted Setup Required | |||
Post-Quantum Security | Theoretical, not yet practical | ||
Prover Time (Complex Op) | ~7 seconds | ~0.5 seconds | Minutes to hours (program-dependent) |
Verifier Time | < 100 ms | < 10 ms | < 100 ms |
Developer Abstraction | Circuit languages (Circom) | Cairo VM | General-purpose languages (Rust, C++) |
On-Chain Verification Gas Cost (ETH L1) | ~500K gas | ~2-3M gas | ~300K - 5M+ gas (circuit-dependent) |
counter-argument
THE FUTURE OF CONSENT
The Inevitable Collision: ZK Proofs vs. Legacy Compliance
Zero-knowledge proofs are redefining user sovereignty by enabling selective data disclosure, directly challenging the all-or-nothing data collection model of legacy compliance systems.
Selective disclosure is the standard. ZK proofs like zk-SNARKs and zk-STARKs allow users to prove a statement (e.g., 'I am over 18') without revealing the underlying data (their birthdate). This inverts the Know Your Customer (KYC) model, which mandates full data surrender to centralized validators like Jumio or Onfido.
Compliance becomes a verifiable computation. Instead of storing sensitive documents, institutions verify a ZK proof. The proof itself is the compliance artifact, auditable on-chain. This shifts risk from data breach liability to cryptographic soundness, a trade-off legacy finance is not equipped to evaluate.
Real-world adoption is nascent but targeted. Polygon ID and zkPass are building protocols for private credential verification. Their success depends on regulators accepting a cryptographic proof as legal proof, a battle being fought in jurisdictions like the EU's eIDAS 2.0 framework.
risk-analysis
THE FUTURE OF CONSENT: ZK PROOFS FOR SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE
What Could Go Wrong? The Bear Case
Zero-Knowledge proofs promise user sovereignty, but systemic risks and perverse incentives could undermine the vision.
01
The Privacy-Utility Tradeoff Becomes a Chasm
ZK proofs for selective disclosure add significant computational overhead and user friction for every verification. The market may reject this cost for marginal privacy gains, leading to a bifurcation where only illicit activity uses strong privacy, tainting the tech.\n- User Drop-off: Each proof generation step can increase abandonment rates by ~30%.\n- Cost Proliferation: Proving a simple credential could cost $0.50+ on L1, negating value for micro-transactions.
+30%
Abandonment
$0.50+
Base Cost
02
Centralized Proving Services Become the New Custodians
The complexity of ZK circuit development and proving will lead to reliance on a few centralized services (e.g., zkSNARKs-as-a-Service). This recreates the trusted third-party problem ZK aimed to solve, creating single points of failure and censorship.\n- Market Consolidation: Expect <5 major providers to control ~80% of proving market share.\n- Regulatory Capture: These choke points become easy targets for KYC/AML mandates, breaking privacy guarantees.
<5
Dominant Providers
~80%
Market Share
03
The "Nothing to Hide" Fallacy Wins
Mass adoption requires simplicity. The average user, conditioned by Web2, may see no value in selectively disclosing a hashed credential over just sharing the raw data with a "trusted" app. Convenience will beat sovereignty, making ZK a niche tool.\n- Adoption Ceiling: Without killer UX, ZK privacy features may be used by <1% of mainstream dApp users.\n- Data Leakage: Centralized front-ends and oracles will re-aggregate disclosed data, rendering on-chain privacy moot.
<1%
Mainstream Use
100%
Front-End Risk
04
ZK Oracles: The New Truth Monopoly
Selective disclosure often depends on oracles to verify real-world claims (e.g., credit score > 700). ZK-proofed oracles like Chainlink or Pyth become the ultimate arbiters of truth, creating a more opaque and harder-to-audit form of centralization than current systems.\n- Trust Transfer: Shifts trust from transparent, multi-sig committees to cryptographic black boxes.\n- Cartel Formation: Oracle networks could collude to censor or manipulate proofs for entire credential ecosystems.
1
Truth Source
Opaque
Audit Trail
future-outlook
THE CONSENT
Future Outlook: The Six-Month Horizon
Zero-knowledge proofs will shift identity from binary exposure to programmable, selective disclosure.
ZK proofs for selective disclosure will dominate the identity narrative. Instead of exposing a full credential, users prove specific attributes (e.g., age > 21) without revealing their birthdate or wallet address.
The standard will be EIP-712 signatures, not monolithic ZK-SNARKs. This creates a pragmatic bridge, allowing dApps to request specific data points with user consent before transitioning to full ZK proofs.
Projects like Sismo and Polygon ID will integrate with existing Web2 OAuth flows. The goal is not to replace Google Sign-In but to layer programmable privacy on top of it.
Evidence: Sismo's ZK Badges, built on Semaphore, already enable anonymous attestations for Sybil resistance in protocols like Lens and Aave.
takeaways
FROM OVERSHARE TO SELECTIVE PROOF
Executive Summary
Zero-Knowledge Proofs are shifting digital consent from wholesale data surrender to verifiable, minimal disclosure.
01
The Problem: The All-or-Nothing Data Dump
Current KYC/AML and identity checks require handing over your entire document, exposing sensitive data like address and birthdate just to prove you're over 18. This creates honeypots for breaches and strips user agency.
- Attack Surface: Centralized data silos are breached ~1,000 times annually.
- Compliance Cost: Manual verification costs range from $5-$15 per check.
~1K
Breaches/Year
$5-$15
Per Check Cost
02
The Solution: ZK-Proofs for Programmable Credentials
Protocols like Sismo and Worldcoin enable users to generate a ZK proof from a verified credential, disclosing only the required claim (e.g., '>18', 'unique human'). The verifier gets cryptographic certainty without the underlying data.
- Privacy-Preserving: Data stays with the user; only the proof is shared.
- Composable: Proofs from one dApp (e.g., proof-of-personhood) can be reused across DeFi and governance.
0
Data Exposed
Reusable
Credentials
03
The Killer App: Private On-Chain Compliance
This enables Tornado Cash-compliant DeFi and institutional onboarding. A user can prove they are a non-sanctioned entity from a whitelisted jurisdiction without revealing their wallet address or passport details, satisfying regulators like the FATF while preserving pseudonymity.
- Market Access: Unlocks $10B+ in institutional capital constrained by privacy-compliance conflicts.
- Regulatory Fit: Aligns with GDPR's data minimization principle and travel rule proposals.
$10B+
Capital Unlocked
GDPR-Aligned
By Design
04
The Bottleneck: Proof Generation Cost & UX
Generating a ZK proof for a complex claim (e.g., credit score > 700) can be computationally intensive, leading to high latency and cost. Projects like RISC Zero and Succinct Labs are building generalized coprocessors to offload and streamline this.
- Current Latency: Proof generation can take 2-10 seconds on-device.
- Cost Target: Needs to fall below ~$0.01 for mass adoption.
2-10s
Proof Latency
<$0.01
Cost Target
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall