P4 · Regulatory Attribute Proof

Store-Network License, Hygiene & Insurance Compliance

Hide original certificates and store-internal data
Prove holds the required permits, hygiene and insurance, valid

Verify that each store in a chain or franchise "validly holds the required licenses, food-hygiene, and insurance" — without receiving originals. Revocation is trackable.

Chains & franchises · Food service · Retail · Hospitality 3 min read
live in production since 2025 · Public-infrastructure PoC in production · ETHGlobal AI Agents 2026 Finalist
01 · WHO IT'S FOR

Who this is for.

For HQ/area managers verifying licenses, food-hygiene, and insurance across many stores or franchisees. Collecting certificate PDFs carries forgery, expiry, and reuse. "Submitted" and "valid now" differ.

  • Compliance and store-development teams at chain/franchise HQs

  • Teams verifying multi-store licenses, hygiene, and insurance in food service, retail, hospitality

  • Teams needing an evidence trail for store-opening review and renewals

02 · THE SHIFT

Hand over the source, or just the facts?

Change what reaches the AI, and the leakage risk goes with it.

Without Lemma
Hand over the original
store_id:
ST-001
location:
Shibuya, Tokyo…
license_no:
restaurant license 12345
hygiene_cert:
HG-2024-001
insurance:
liability insurance ABC-001
expires:
2025-03-31
↓ all of it goes to the AI / outside
With Lemma
Hand over just the facts
holder:
did:lemma:store-ST-001
issuer:
did:lemma:authority-jp-mhlw
jurisdiction:
JP-shibuya
licenseType:
restaurant-operation
disclosed:
[isLicensed, isHygieneCompliant, isInsured, validUntilYear]
hidden:
[license_no, address, inspection_log]
attestation:
all valid
ZK verified:
✓ VALID
↓ only the necessary facts to the AI

Each store presents only a proof that it "validly holds the required license, hygiene, and insurance." Originals aren't handed over. Attributes are issuer-signed; HQ and auditors verify without seeing the contents, and revocation (expiry, withdrawal) is trackable.

(A lawful verification process for each license/insurance is assumed.)

See the technical details ↗
03 · HOW TO CHOOSE

Choose on three criteria.

Only work that needs all three at once — pass without exposing, independent verification, tamper-proof — is Lemma's domain.

Method Pass without exposing Independent verification Tamper-proof
Access control only△✗✗
Masking / anonymization△✗✗
Encryption only✓✗✗
Lemma (ZK proof)the only one with all 3 ✓ ✓ ✓
04 · HOW IT WORKS

What's next

We enter through AI-adoption and data-governance support and a PoC, and stay alongside you through to operations.

  1. A 30-minute review — identify checks where forgery/expiry risk concentrates.
  2. Narrow to 1–2 decisions to prove — e.g. "holds a valid permit," "insurance valid." Not the originals.
  3. Design issuers and revocation — connection to government/insurer/hygiene issuers, expiry/revocation handling.
  4. Prove one path via a (quote-based) PoC.
  5. Hands-on support from rollout through operations — existing plan tiers (Civic / Critical / Compliance) serve only as a cost reference; setup and pricing are designed together.

Tell us the one license with the heaviest verification risk, in the first 30 minutes. No disclosure of sensitive data required.

05 · RELATED

Related

Still have questions? See the FAQ →

The bigger picture

The bigger picture this use case belongs to.

We map use scenarios across industries and workflows by the four axes.

See use scenarios for Regulatory Attribute in Solutions →

TRY LEMMA

Run it yourself.

No sales call needed — start hands-on with Lemma's products.

Try Seal → Trust402 reference implementation →