Work-Fitness Attestation
Prove that staff meet the required health checks, training, and qualifications without exposing personal health data, so assignment and audit can verify without seeing the contents — applicable not only to food and retail but to special training and medicals in manufacturing and critical infrastructure.
For work-fitness teams
Show that a worker is fit for duty without exposing stool-test results or medical data — eliminating the storage-and-leakage liability for special-category data.
-
Hygiene managers in food/retail; safety and special-training leads in manufacturing/infra
-
Teams verifying work-fitness across many staff or contractors
-
Teams wanting an evidence trail for medicals/training without holding health data
Hand over the source, or just the facts?
Nothing changes on the floor. Everything changes for the receiver.
① Your team just saves, as always.
- The usual step
- Fill in the record and save
- On save
- A proof is attached (API, behind the scenes)
- The document itself
- never sent
② They just open a link.
- Proven fact
- meets the required health checks, training and qualifications
- health-check results, training history and sensitive personal data
- not shown
- Login / keys
- not needed
- The document stays private — the record itself is never sent or disclosed.
- Independent verification — the receiver just opens a link. No account, no keys.
- Edits are detected — even a one-character edit fails verification.
Staff present only a proof that they "meet the required health checks, training, and qualifications (work-fitness)." The contents of medicals and attendance aren't disclosed. From issuer-signed attributes (medical, training, certification bodies), only fitness satisfaction is shown. Assignment and audit verify without contents, and expiry is trackable.
(Lawful handling of special-category health data — consent, retention — is assumed; designed with legal.)
Why the usual methods fall short.
Only work that needs all three at once — pass without exposing, independent verification, tamper-evidence — is Lemma's domain.
| Method | Pass without exposing | Independent verification | Tamper-evident | What happens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Access control / permissions | △ | ✗ | ✗ | “Someone inside could have edited it” remains possible |
| Masking / redacted copies | △ | ✗ | ✗ | Redaction work grows; the original is still unproven |
| Encrypt and store / send | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | To verify, the receiver needs it disclosed after all |
| Lemma (ZK proof)the only one with all 3 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | The receiver just opens a link |
How it works — and how to start.
We help design disclosure scope and retention, run the PoC, and support production.
Start with a 30-minute call.
Tell us the one work-fitness check with the heaviest special-category-data storage, in the first 30 minutes. No disclosure of sensitive data required.
Find the case that matches your industry and problem
Browse all 36 use cases →TRY LEMMA
Run it yourself.
No sales call needed — start hands-on with Lemma's products.