ZK-Identity for AI can prove that your agents followed approved logic and policy—without disclosing model weights or proprietary code—so you can ship faster into regulated environments while protecting IP. The payoff: auditable, TEE-attested, and ZK-verified agent decisions that shorten procurement cycles and de-risk EU AI Act deadlines.

Title: ZK-Identity for AI: Verifying Agent Logic Without Revealing Code

Hook — the headache you’re living with now

• Your security team wants to code-review and pen-test every autonomous agent before production, but your models and toolchains are proprietary.
• Reasoning-grade models can be powerful—and occasionally deceptive—undermining auditability and trust when agents operate over sensitive data and costly APIs. Recent reporting and independent research around o-model families highlights why “trust the output” is not enough. (theverge.com)
• Meanwhile, EU AI Act transparency and high‑risk obligations kick in August 2, 2026—your policy, logging, and explainability evidence must be provable, not performative. (digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu)

Agitate — what it’s costing you

• Missed launch windows: Without verifiable attestations, legal and security hold the release. Every re-review burns sprint capacity and vendor goodwill.
• RFP losses: Buyers increasingly demand “cryptographic proof of policy compliance” and “no code disclosure.” If you can’t hand over artifacts, you’re out in round one.
• Siloed proofs: TEE attestations, identity credentials, and ZK proofs exist—but in different stacks. Stitching them post-hoc creates fragile, non-reusable audits.
• Cost overrun risks: Unoptimized zkML can add minutes per inference; without circuit-level reductions (sparsity, fused lookups), ROI collapses. State-of-the-art shows multi‑X speedups are available if you design for them. (eprint.iacr.org)

Solve — 7Block Labs’ methodology to verify agent logic without revealing code We implement ZK‑Identity for AI as a composable control plane spanning identity, execution, and proofs—designed to satisfy procurement and regulators without exposing IP.

1. Identity and selective disclosure that maps to your SSO

• W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 for agent, model, and operator identity. We issue/verify credentials for “allowed tools,” “data residency,” “policy version,” and “risk class.” (w3.org)
• Selective disclosure with SD‑JWT (RFC 9901) so you can prove the right attributes for an audit—without revealing everything. (ietf.org)
• Interoperable presentation flows with OpenID for Verifiable Presentations (OpenID4VP) 1.0, finalized July 10, 2025, and OID4VCI for issuance; self‑certification starts February 2026. This plugs into enterprise OAuth/OIDC with minimum friction. (openid.net)

1. Confidential execution for models and prompts

• We harden the inference step using Confidential Computing:
  • Nvidia confidential GPUs across Hopper/Blackwell/Rubin families protect model weights, memory, and kernel execution with near‑native performance and no code changes. (nvidia.com)
  • Intel Trust Authority provides attestation for Intel TDX on GCP Confidential Spaces, issuing OIDC‑compliant tokens we bind into the proof bundle. (docs.trustauthority.intel.com)
• Why this matters: Procurement can accept “we ran here” without inspecting code; regulators get hardware‑rooted integrity for sensitive steps.

1. Zero‑knowledge proofs that the agent followed policy

• We compile “policy checkers” (budget caps, tool allow‑lists, PII handling, trade limits) into ZK circuits and attach a succinct proof to each agent action. We choose the proving stack based on workload:
  • Halo2/lookup‑friendly circuits for ML layers and rule checks; new zkML work (e.g., TeleSparse) shows 46% faster proving and 67% lower memory via sparsification and activation‑range optimization. (arxiv.org)
  • zkVMs when policies are easier to express as programs: Succinct’s SP1 demonstrates 4–28× speedups over other zkVMs and competitive performance vs custom circuits—accelerating teams that don’t want to hand‑roll circuits. (succinct.xyz)
  • For LLM inference proofs, recent systems like zkGPT report GPT‑2 inference proofs in under 25 seconds with order‑of‑magnitude speedups vs prior art—good enough for gated, high‑value actions. (eprint.iacr.org)
• We avoid disclosing weights or source by committing to them (hash/commitment) and proving “this committed model + this committed policy produced output O on input I” in zero‑knowledge. Recent zk‑inference research and commit‑and‑prove SNARKs (e.g., Artemis) make these pipelines practical at enterprise scales. (arxiv.org)

1. Cheap, auditable on‑chain anchoring (no vendor lock‑in)

• We anchor attestations and proof digests to Ethereum via EIP‑4844 blobs—cheaper than calldata, short‑lived (~2 weeks), and forward‑compatible with full danksharding. This keeps recurring costs low and avoids permanent data bloat while preserving auditability windows. (eip4844.com)
• Post‑EIP‑4844 data posting for rollups dropped on the order of ~80% per MiB; blob gas markets are volatile but responsive, informing cost models for anchoring proofs at scale. (emergentmind.com)

1. Agent wallet controls that enforce policy at execution

• We bind identity + policy to funds and API keys via Account Abstraction (EIP‑4337) smart accounts: session keys, spend limits, and allow‑listed targets enforced on‑chain—so even a misbehaving agent can’t exceed policy. 2024–2025 adoption data shows 4337 moving from experiment to production with millions of smart accounts and sponsored operations. (alchemy.com)

Reference architecture — proof-carrying agents (verifiable autonomy)

• Step 0 (Provisioning): Issue W3C VCs to the agent (capabilities, data zones, policy version). Register presentation via OpenID4VP.
• Step 1 (Plan): Agent composes a plan; a local checker produces a ZK proof that plan tokens/tools respect “allow-list + budget + PII rules.”
• Step 2 (Execute): Inference runs inside a confidential GPU or TDX enclave; the platform captures TEE attestation.
• Step 3 (Verify): A zkVM or Halo2 circuit proves policy predicates held over the plan+trace (e.g., “all API calls match allow‑list,” “spend ≤ $X,” “no raw PII left the enclave”).
• Step 4 (Anchor): Post a digest bundle (attestation token + proof hash) to an EIP‑4844 blob; store full proof off‑chain with content addressing.
• Step 5 (Settle): A 4337 smart account accepts or rejects the action based on proof verification and policy VC claims; if accepted, it executes payment or on‑chain interaction.

Practical examples with 2026-ready controls

Example A — “No‑leak bid bot” for enterprise procurement

• Problem: An autonomous sourcing agent drafts bids using proprietary cost models and supplier terms. Legal demands proof it didn’t exceed disclosure rules or bid outside risk bands.
• Implementation:
  • Identity: Issue SD‑JWT‑VCs for “supplier list,” “budget band,” and “region” to the agent; present via OpenID4VP to the buyer’s verifier. (ietf.org)
  • Execution: Generate pricing and language inside a Hopper/Blackwell confidential enclave; bind Nvidia attestation to the session. (nvidia.com)
  • Proof: Produce a ZK proof that (a) all cited suppliers ∈ approved_list, (b) unit price deltas stayed within thresholds, (c) no raw PII or trade secrets left enclave memory. Circuit uses lookup tables for string-category checks and Poseidon/Keccak commitments for inputs.
  • Audit: Anchor proof digests in blobs; 30‑day rolling off‑chain retention with automated re‑proof if a regulator requests deep review. (eip4844.com)
• Why it passes procurement: You deliver verifiable compliance evidence without disclosing the pricing model or prompt chain.

Example B — Patient‑triage assistant under AI Act Article 50 transparency

• Problem: Hospital wants LLM‑assisted triage; must label AI‑generated content and maintain traceable logs by August 2, 2026.
• Implementation:
  • Identity: W3C VC 2.0 credentials for “licensed facility,” “on‑call clinician,” “policy version” + SD‑JWT‑VC for patient consent attributes (age>18, consent=true) without revealing identity. (w3.org)
  • Execution: Triage inference in a TDX VM with Trust Authority attestation; attach OIDC token to the proof bundle. (docs.trustauthority.intel.com)
  • Proof: zkML checker proves “decision path referenced only ICD‑10‑whitelisted terms” and “risk score thresholding used policy v1.7.” Emerging zkLLM/zkML systems and commit‑and‑prove frameworks make this tractable for medium‑size models and rulesets today. (emergentmind.com)
  • Transparency: Content labeling and traceability are satisfied with signed outputs + anchored proofs, aligning with the AI Act timeline and guidance cadence running into August 2026. (digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu)

Example C — DeFi treasury risk agent (policy-constrained)

• Problem: Corporate treasury wants on‑chain liquidity but must enforce exposure caps, TWAP deviation limits, and venue allow‑lists.
• Implementation:
  • Identity + Wallet: EIP‑4337 smart account with verifiable allow‑lists; policy VC binds eligible venues and positions. (alchemy.com)
  • Execution: Off‑chain risk calc in zkVM (SP1) for fast proving; attach proof of “exposure ≤ cap” and “venue ∈ allow‑list” to each rebalance transaction. Benchmarked performance gains reduce latency enough for scheduled rebalances. (succinct.xyz)
  • Optional: zkWASM for portable verifiable risk code paths, now supporting stateless proof distribution to cut prover onboarding costs. (delphinuslab.com)

Best emerging practices we’re applying in 2026 builds

• Treat “policy as code” like product:
  • Encode rules once; prove everywhere. Favor sum‑check‑friendly encodings, small‑domain lookups, and fixed‑point math for circuit predictability.
• Start with TEE, end with ZK:
  • Run sensitive inference in enclaves; prove policy predicates in ZK. You reduce proof size while preserving confidentiality. Nvidia and Intel tooling make this feasible in mainstream clouds today. (nvidia.com)
• Choose the right proving stack per constraint:
  • zkVMs (SP1, RISC Zero) for fast iteration and general programs; circuit frameworks (Halo2) for hot paths and ML layers requiring lookup optimizations. Track vendor release cadences—RISC Zero’s 2025 upgrades and SP1 performance work closed the gap substantially. (releasealert.dev)
• Optimize zkML early:
  • Use sparsification and activation‑range narrowing (e.g., TeleSparse) to slash constraint counts; target sub‑30s proof times for gated actions. (arxiv.org)
• Anchor intelligently:
  • Use EIP‑4844 blobs for rolling proofs; retain long‑term evidence off‑chain with hash commitments. Know that blobs are pruned after ~2 weeks—plan re‑proof or archive windows accordingly. (eip4844.com)
• Ship interoperability, not a dead‑end:
  • Align with W3C VCDM 2.0, SD‑JWT, and OpenID4VP so your proofs travel across buyers, regulators, and auditors without bespoke adapters. (w3.org)

GTM proof — the metrics that move deals across the line We measure the ROI of ZK‑Identity for AI in procurement, compliance, and ops. You can, too.

• Compliance‑driven acceleration
  • Target: 30–50% reduction in “security review to green‑light” by shipping a standard proof bundle: TEE attestation + VC claims + ZK policy proofs.
  • Why believable: Your reviewers validate tokens and proofs mechanically; no NDA code escrow. This directly addresses Article 50 transparency obligations by August 2, 2026. (digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu)
• Verified autonomy, fewer rollbacks
  • Target: ≥25% drop in post‑deploy incidents linked to policy violations. Enforcement at the wallet (4337) plus ZK policy proofs prevent bad executions from settling. (alchemy.com)
• Performance that sustains ROI
  • Baseline: zkLLM inference proofs are sub‑25s for GPT‑2 class models; zkML sparsification cuts proving time by ~46%; modern zkVMs (SP1) slash general‑program proving time by 4–28× vs peers—meaning verification can run behind the scenes without user‑visible latency for gated actions. (eprint.iacr.org)
• Audit readiness
  • Target: Shift from ad‑hoc document collection to “one‑click replay” of an anchored proof chain. For EU AI Act audits starting August 2026, produce VC presentations + SD‑JWT claims + proof digests with deterministic replay. (digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu)

Who this is for (and the keywords your stakeholders actually search)

• CIO / Head of AI Platforms in regulated enterprises:
  • “OpenID4VP,” “SD‑JWT VC,” “W3C VCDM 2.0,” “Article 50 transparency,” “AI audit trail,” “TEE attestation (Intel TDX/Nvidia Confidential GPUs).” (openid.net)
• Chief Information Security Officer / AI Governance Lead:
  • “proof‑carrying agents,” “zkML inference proof,” “Halo2 lookup tables,” “SP1 zkVM benchmarks,” “policy‑as‑code compliance.” (arxiv.org)
• Head of Treasury / Risk in crypto‑adjacent corporates:
  • “EIP‑4337 session keys,” “on‑chain enforcement,” “verifiable off‑chain risk calc,” “zkWASM stateless prover.” (alchemy.com)
• Procurement and Legal:
  • “no code disclosure,” “cryptographic proof of policy compliance,” “trust‑minimized vendor diligence,” “provable confidentiality.”

How we execute with you (roadmap you can take to your steering committee)

• Week 1–2 Assessment:
  • Select a single, high‑impact agent workflow; map policy predicates to ZK‑verifiable checks; integrate with your IdP using OpenID4VP for presentations.
• Weeks 3–6 Pilot build:
  • Stand up confidential inference (Nvidia CC or Intel TDX); implement policy circuits (Halo2 or zkVM); bind wallet controls with EIP‑4337.
• Weeks 7–9 Hardening:
  • Add SD‑JWT selective disclosure; attach TEE attestations; establish EIP‑4844 anchoring with cost guardrails; integrate dashboards and alerting.
• Weeks 10–12 Productionize:
  • Roll out the “proof bundle” for procurement and audits; extend to a second workflow; train Security and Legal on verification runbooks.

Where 7Block Labs fits

• Architecture and build: From confidential inference and circuit design to on‑chain verification and devops for provers, our team shortens your path to compliant autonomy.
• Security and audit readiness: We package OpenID4VP flows, SD‑JWT claims, and verifiable compute into artifacts your buyers and regulators can check without NDAs or platform‑specific tooling.
• Measured outcomes: We set KPIs at kickoff and tie success to cycle time, audit findings, and operational incidents—not just “model accuracy.”

Let’s implement this in your stack

• If you’re the AI Platform/Governance lead who must be audit‑ready by August 2, 2026 (Article 50) and can’t disclose model code, book a 45‑minute working session. We’ll map one agent workflow to: OpenID4VP presentations + SD‑JWT selective disclosure, Nvidia/TDX enclave attestation, and a ZK proof bundle anchored via EIP‑4844—then pilot it in your environment in 6 weeks. Start here:
  • Explore our custom blockchain development services for verifiable compute backends. https://7blocklabs.com/services/blockchain-development-services
  • Engage our security audit services to formalize policy‑as‑code and verification runbooks. https://7blocklabs.com/services/security-audit-services
  • If you need wallet‑level enforcement and policy‑gated transactions, our smart contract development and dApp development teams have you covered. https://7blocklabs.com/solutions/smart-contract-development https://7blocklabs.com/solutions/dapp-development
  • Connect agents to existing systems through our blockchain integration expertise. https://7blocklabs.com/services/blockchain-integration
  • For multi‑chain footprints or cross‑domain proving, see our cross‑chain solutions development. https://7blocklabs.com/services/cross-chain-solutions-development

Notes and proof points you can forward to stakeholders

• EU AI Act timing: transparency and many high‑risk rules apply from August 2, 2026; full rollout continues into 2027. (ai-act-service-desk.ec.europa.eu)
• Confidential GPUs and TDX attestations are production‑ready and issue OIDC‑compatible tokens. (nvidia.com)
• W3C VCDM 2.0 is a 2025 Recommendation; SD‑JWT is an IETF standard (RFC 9901); OpenID4VP is finalized; self‑certification launches Feb 2026. (w3.org)
• EIP‑4844 properties: KZG‑committed blobs, pruned ~2 weeks, more cost‑efficient than calldata—ideal for ephemeral audit anchors. Post‑4844 analyses show ~80%+ data‑posting cost reductions for L2s. (eip4844.com)
• zkML/zkVM practicality: sub‑25s LLM proofs on GPT‑2‑class models; 46% proving‑time reductions via sparsity; zkVMs like SP1 delivering 4–28× speedups on real workloads. (eprint.iacr.org)

Because this is about your outcomes

• The goal isn’t to “do ZK.” It’s to make compliance verifiable, procurement predictable, and IP protected—so you can ship agentic systems into production, on time, with confidence.

If this reads like exactly what your steering committee has been asking for, we should talk. Reply with the agent workflow you need to ship by Q2, your IdP (Okta/Azure AD/ForgeRock), and your preferred cloud, and 7Block Labs will return a tailored ZK‑Identity pilot plan with timeline, proving stack, and cost envelope you can take straight to governance.