Menu
Contact
Contact

Topics · Protocol concept

Evidence Graph

Fragments can resolve to candidate receipts, anchors, and linked audit trails.

Concrete scenario

What this looks like in practice

A media forensics lab receives a viral image with no metadata. They have the pixels and a rough publication window. They need to discover whether a related ZK-SNAP receipt, anchor, or disclosure path exists — without treating the search index as proof of validity.

Problem

What breaks today

Investigations start with fragments: a copied file, a partial export, a time window, an incident ticket. Validity must still be decided by cryptography; discovery must help people find the right receipt trail quickly.

Mechanism

How ZK-SNAP responds

Evidence Graph ingests canonical receipt facts, content roots, anchor references, and disclosure paths for correlation and forensic traversal across operators and time windows. It accelerates discovery; receipt validity remains the job of the verifier and declared profiles, never the search index.

Verifiable outcome

What a verifier can check

  • Discovery hits link to receipt_id and anchor facts that can be fetched for verification.
  • Graph traversal preserves separation between discovery metadata and validity outcomes.
  • Content-root correlation suggests related receipts; signature checks confirm them.
  • Disclosure paths reveal only authorized evidence openings.

Related profiles and labels

Evidence GraphForensic traversalDiscovery

Protocol terms

Definitions that apply here

EG Evidence Graph — discovery and forensics for proof trails.

Scope boundary

What a receipt does not replace

Evidence Graph is a discovery and forensics layer — not a validity oracle, governance authority, or replacement for Chain finality rules.

Go deeper

Try the workflow, then read the spec.

Use Cases tells the story with cards. Proof Lab runs create and verify locally. Protocol holds the normative reference.

Protocol reference How it works Proof Lab