Concrete scenario
What this looks like in practice
A safety report embeds a sensor chart exported from an operations tool. Six months later an investigator receives a PDF screen shot in email. The original portal account is inactive. They need to know whether the visible chart still matches the measurement set that was signed when the incident occurred.
Problem
What breaks today
Files outlive the systems that created them. Metadata strips away, screen shots replace originals, and embeds break the link between what you are looking at and what was actually signed.
Mechanism
How ZK-SNAP responds
The producer commits artifact roots and fingerprints into the receipt claim. A verifier recomputes the digest profile over the candidate file and compares it to the signed inputs_root binding — checking cryptography locally instead of trusting the original service UI.
Verifiable outcome
What a verifier can check
- Artifact digest recomputes under the declared profile and matches the committed root in inputs_root.
- Receipt signature and receipt_id remain valid after the file has left the original system.
- Claim fields disclose only what the producer chose to include; sealed commitments stay closed until opened.
- Sigil state reflects offline validity (S4) from verifier output — not a platform badge.
Scope boundary
What a receipt does not replace
Fingerprint binding proves integrity against the signed commitment, not intent, authorship disputes outside the claim, or that the original capture device was honest — those require additional profiles, witnesses, or governance layers.