Prove you qualify without revealing your score—or letting two employers compare notes

Acme needs a straight answer: did she clear the bar for senior data engineering work on this contract? NovaTech needs the same kind of answer six months later. Neither employer needs her exact score, her full employment history, or a correlatable artifact that lets two hiring teams prove they interviewed the same person when she deliberately did not disclose her DID.

Traditional “selective disclosure” often means “hide some JSON fields.” That helps with oversharing. It does not automatically fix linkability: if every presentation bears the same issuer signature over the same credential body, colluding verifiers can still line up presentations like matching fingerprints.

Beatriz wants to prove qualification without becoming a trackable object across companies. That is not vanity—it is labor-market dignity.

What BBS+ buys you

Unlinkable presentations: each proof is fresh; verifiers should not be able to correlate by signature alone.

Selective disclosure across many signed claims without asking the issuer to re-sign for every combination.

Honest staging: production BBS+ libraries give you selective disclosure and unlinkability; arbitrary numeric range proofs are not universally bundled the way bulletproofs are a different stack. Our Phase 6.1 path uses issuer-issued predicates where needed and names the roadmap to fuller range proofs—in the product narrative, not only in a ticket.

Why boolean proxy claims fail the wrong way

A tempting shortcut is to precompute score_above_80: true and put that boolean in the credential. Two problems:

Oracle centralization: someone—often the platform—had to see the raw score to mint the boolean. You have reintroduced trust us at the center.
Linkability: depending on credential shape, you may still correlate presentations unless the proof system gives fresh proofs per presentation.

BBS+ addresses linkability directly. Range proofs address numeric predicates without revealing the number—Phase 6.2 territory in our plan, not something we pretend already shipped.

So what?

Ask vendors hard questions:

Is my presentation unlinkable across verifiers? If the answer is “we only use SD-JWT,” understand the threat model—and ask for when BBS+ or equivalent lands.
Who sees the raw score when a threshold is enforced? If only the issuer ever sees it, say that clearly—and document the trust boundary.

Privacy is not a checkbox next to “GDPR compliant.” It is a property of the proof system and the economics of who learns what.

Technical companion: BBS+ alongside SD-JWT — libraries, keys, predicates. Passport series: credential scanner.