B

Zero-Knowledge Age Verification SDK

3.05

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Conflict between age verification and data protection
→
Step 2 Operators of services requiring age verification
→
Step 3 Privacy-preserving age verification middleware

Problem

Korean online service operators in gaming, alcohol, and adult content (mid-size Platforms, 10–50 employees) requiring age verification face per-transaction costs of 50–100 KRW ($0.04–$0.08) for identity verification API integration (e.g., PASS) plus personal data retention obligations from collecting resident registration numbers. At 1 million verifications per year, costs reach 50–100 million KRW ($37,500–$75,000), plus liability risk from personal data breaches.

Solution

A zero-knowledge proof (ZKP)-based age verification SDK that confirms only whether a user is 19+ without exposing their actual date of birth to the service. (1) One-time identity verification generates a ZKP token, (2) the service only validates the token (no personal data storage), (3) adapters provided for existing PASS/Kakao verification integration.

Target: Development teams at mid-size online Platforms (10–50 employees) serving age-restricted content
Revenue Model: API call Billing at 30 KRW ($0.02) Per Transaction (40–70% savings vs. traditional verification), minimum monthly fee of 50,000 KRW ($37.50). Volume discount to 20 KRW ($0.015) Per Transaction above 1 million calls/month
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 1_month

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
2.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (56%)

Tech Complexity
24.7/40
Data Availability
19.4/25
MVP Timeline
12.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (70/100)

Competition
10.0/20
Market Demand
20.0/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
12.0/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
Solo Buildability
3.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [high] Frontend [low] Infrastructure [medium]
Dashboard