Zero-Knowledge Proofs: The Future of Identity Verification in Governance Ops

Efficient identity verification is fast becoming the gatekeeper of governance. From onboarding directors to verifying investors, the ability to confirm identity is a strategic priority for legal and finance leaders. Without it, filings stall, compliance falters and trust breaks down.

Regulators are also raising the bar. The UK’s Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECCTA) will require company directors and Persons with Significant Control (PSCs) to complete formal identity verification from 18 November 2025. In the EU, eIDAS 2.0 will require Member States to roll out a European Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet by 2026, aiming for 80% adoption by 2030.

These changes reflect a global trend: identity verification is no longer occasional or reactive: It’s becoming embedded into the fabric of corporate governance operations.

But with every new requirement comes a tension. The more verification regulators demand, the more personal data is shared, duplicated and exposed to risk. IBM’s latest Cost of a Data Breach report estimates the average global breach cost at $4.44 million. For governance leaders, the challenge is to meet verification requirements without multiplying exposure and risk.

Enter zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs), a cryptographic innovation that could transform verification processes in governance.

Understanding zero-knowledge proofs

At its core, a zero-knowledge proof allows someone to prove that a statement is true without revealing the data behind it. In other words, it’s a way to confirm facts such as identity, age or credentials without exposing personal details. Imagine a director proving they are who they claim to be without submitting a passport scan or disclosing their date of birth.

The appeal lies in four key qualities:

• Privacy, because only the relevant information is revealed
• Selective disclosure, because the user decides what to share
• Data minimization, reducing what organizations collect and store
• Security, since sensitive documents remain protected

Momentum is building across industries. In 2025, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) finalized the Verifiable Credentials (VC) 2.0 standard, enabling credentials with selective disclosure and cryptographic proofs. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has engaged with the ZKProof community since 2019, exploring standardization paths. Financial services, fintechs and KYC providers are piloting these approaches, testing how ZKP protocols might streamline verification while preserving privacy.

For Governance Ops leaders, the promise is clear: a future where compliance requirements can be met securely, efficiently and with far less exposure of sensitive data.

What ZK verification means for Governance Ops™

Identity checks are woven into every layer of governance operations, from director appointments to PSC declarations, investor onboarding and signatory management. Today, these processes often rely on document-heavy workflows that involve collecting, copying and storing the same information across multiple systems. It’s laborious, inefficient and introduces unnecessary risk.

ZK verification could change that. Instead of exchanging scanned IDs, organizations could rely on digital credentials that confirm only the attributes needed — for example, that a director’s identity has been verified by an approved issuer, without revealing passport numbers or dates of birth. For international structures, this approach could streamline cross-border governance by allowing directors and investors to reuse the same verified credential across jurisdictions.

Beyond convenience, the shift has real implications for risk management. The less personally identifiable information (PII) a company stores, the smaller its exposure if a breach occurs. Minimizing the data surface area of governance systems doesn’t just enhance privacy, it strengthens resilience. And from a user perspective, this model builds trust as ID verification becomes less intrusive, faster and more transparent.

Still, realism is important. Today’s frameworks, including ECCTA, are designed around document-based checks. A cryptographic credential can’t yet replace a passport or government-issued ID. For ZK verification to take hold in governance, regulators will need to accept cryptographic proofs as valid evidence, and that transition will take time.

Regulation meets innovation

Regulation and innovation have always evolved on different timelines. Regulators value transparency, auditability and accountability, while innovators prioritize speed, privacy and user control. The promise of zero-knowledge identity verification sits squarely between those goals, and realizing it will depend on building trust, infrastructure and legal recognition.

The first requirement is trusted issuers. Governments, banks and regulated service providers must be able to issue digital identity credentials that are legally recognized. Without trusted issuers, even the most advanced cryptographic method lacks evidentiary weight.

Next comes interoperability. Credentials should be verifiable across jurisdictions and platforms, allowing a company’s boardroom in London to confirm a credential issued in Frankfurt or Toronto with equal confidence. Standards like W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 and the EU’s eIDAS 2.0 framework are paving the way for that consistency.

Finally, regulatory acceptance will determine how far and fast ZK verification can go. Supervisory bodies must explicitly define where cryptographic proofs can replace document-based evidence, under what assurance levels and with what safeguards. Until that clarity arrives, ZK verification will operate alongside traditional methods rather than replacing them. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes, ZKPs are a powerful privacy tool, but not a standalone solution without governance, oversight and consistent rules of engagement.

The strategic outlook for governance leaders

Governance and fund ops professionals don’t need to master the mathematics of ZK proofs, but they should understand the direction of travel. The regulatory and technological momentum around digital identity is unmistakable.

Leaders should pay close attention to policy signals — from the UK’s ECCTA rollout to the EU’s EUDI Wallet initiative — as these programs will shape expectations around identity assurance. They should also watch industry pilots in banking and financial services, where the balance between compliance and privacy is being tested at scale. These experiments often set the tone for what regulators will later accept more broadly.

Perhaps most importantly, teams should think now about infrastructure readiness. Today’s leading entity management platforms like Athennian already centralize verification workflows, integrate with regulators like Companies House and automate reminders. In the future, these systems may serve as the foundation for incorporating ZK-enabled credentials, providing a bridge between today’s document-based processes and tomorrow’s privacy-preserving verification.

Privacy, compliance and the path ahead

Identity verification is no longer a formality in governance ops; it’s the gateway to action. The challenge for leaders is how to meet intensifying compliance demands without amplifying data risk. Zero-knowledge proofs offer a glimpse of what that balance could look like: a model where organizations can satisfy regulators while drastically reducing the sensitive data they collect and store.

We’re not there yet. Current laws like ECCTA still depend on conventional document checks. But the groundwork is being laid. With the emergence of Verifiable Credentials 2.0, eIDAS 2.0 and global momentum toward digital trust frameworks, the evolution toward more privacy-aware compliance seems inevitable.

For governance and fund ops leaders, the task is twofold: ensure readiness for current requirements and stay attuned to what’s coming next. Athennian helps organizations do both — providing integrated tools for today’s identity verification landscape while tracking the innovations that will shape governance in the years ahead.