A breach somewhere else stops mattering
The companies you applied to are not holding a pile of your documents, because you granted fields rather than sending files. There is much less of you out there to lose.
Verigrant › People applying
You have typed your work history, your education, your address and your documents into more forms than you can count, and every single one of them kept a copy you will never see again. Fill it in here once and it is yours. What you fill in is not another application: it is structured information you keep and control, and an institution receives the part it asked for only at the moment you grant it. After that, applying to a job, a college, an apartment or a lender is a matter of saying yes.
Free forever. It takes about an hour, once, and then you stop being asked.
Not on purpose. One form at a time, one attachment at a time, because there was never another way to apply for anything. The result is the same either way: your history is sitting in dozens of databases you cannot name, and there is nothing you can press to get it back.
How it works today
With Verigrant
Nobody thinks of it that way, because the two forms look different and arrive years apart. Look at what they ask for and they are the same request. Who are you, what have you done, where have you been, can you prove it. One person, one history, one set of documents, asked for twice in different clothes.
Your transcripts, your essays and the forms behind them go in once and go out to as many schools as you like. There is no second upload and no third portal account. If you asked for a check on something, the signed note it produced travels with the application, so the tenth school reads the same note the first one did without anybody starting the check again.
Then you graduate, and the education you already entered is the education section an employer reads. Nothing is migrated, because nothing moved. It was always the same application.
Slide to the level that suits you. It is the same four steps either way, and the second level is the one to read if you are the sort of person who wants to know what the software is actually doing.
The security page carries the same argument at full length, including the parts that are inconvenient for us. Read the security page
Filling this in properly takes about as long as three careful applications do today. Here is what it buys you.
The companies you applied to are not holding a pile of your documents, because you granted fields rather than sending files. There is much less of you out there to lose.
A role this year, a course next year, a flat after that. You keep editing the same thing rather than rebuilding it from memory each time somebody asks.
An agent filling forms on your behalf is guessing at what you meant. Here it reads nothing and claims nothing for you. It applies, and you are the one who answers.
Download the whole application as a file that unlocks with a phrase you choose. Your backup does not depend on this company continuing to exist.
A Vera ID is the name you give an assistant so it can apply on your behalf. There are two modes, review and auto, and the only difference between them is whether you are in the loop for every disclosure. You set how long a share lasts in both.
Review mode, and the default
Auto mode, for people who want no clicks
Auto mode means that you, the one agent you chose, and anyone that agent's key leaks to before you next sign in, can read the fields you allowed for the window you allowed. We still cannot. That is the trade, and it is why review mode is the default and the one we recommend.
If a place wants more than your word, you can ask for a check. Today a member of Verigrant staff reviews it and records what they found, with outside verification vendors to follow. What comes back to you, if it is approved, is a short note naming the kind of check, who ran it and the date, and you attach that note to an application yourself.
The note is signed, so anybody can check it later with a key we publish and never has to ask us anything. That is what makes it worth the same at the tenth school as at the first. What the note never says is that your application is true. We do not display it, rank it or summarise it, and we could not stand behind the record it travels with even if we wanted to, because we cannot read that record.
The moment a middle layer starts standing behind facts about people, it becomes the kind of company that decides who gets a job, a place or a loan, with all the law and all the responsibility that follows. We would rather be the road than the judge.
It is also the only version that survives contact with encryption. We cannot vouch for an application we are unable to read, so we do not pretend to.
| On the application | Who says it |
|---|---|
| The application itself | You, sealed by you, opened by the institution you chose. |
| The note from a check | Whoever reviewed it, saying what they reviewed and when. |
| The consent | You, signed by you, and checkable later. |
| A judgement | Nobody. There is not one here to give. |
Nothing becomes readable until you make it readable, and it closes when you say so.
The honest limit, said here rather than buried. Revoking a grant stops every future read. It does not reach what an institution already pulled and wrote down, which stays theirs under their own retention, and which is exactly why a grant is small and late rather than large and early.
The awkward ones are here too, answered rather than avoided.
Yes. A job application and a college application are the same person being asked for the same history in two different shapes. Your education section is your transcripts. Your work history is your work history. You fill it in once and grant from it, so applying to a university in the autumn and to an employer in the spring uses the same application and neither one makes you type it again.
About an hour if you do it properly, and you do it once. That is roughly what three careful applications cost you today, and after it you stop paying that cost at all. You can also start with the short version and fill in the rest the first time somebody asks for it.
No. The lock closes on your device, before anything is uploaded, using a key derived from your password and held only in your browser. What our servers store is a sealed block. There is no support tool that opens it, no administrator button, and no route in the software that would let us read it even if we were ordered to. Somebody who stole the entire database would take away locked boxes and no keys.
The outside of the boxes. Your email address, because a login has to be routed somewhere. How many records you keep and roughly how big each one is. When you edit. Which institutions you applied to, when, and which of them moved you forward. We think that is a fair thing to know about us, so it is written out in full on the security page rather than left for you to work out.
The next attempt to read is refused, immediately, with no waiting period and nothing left open behind it. Anything the institution already opened and copied into its own systems is theirs, held under its own retention, and we cannot reach into their database. That is why a grant is small on purpose, and why the full application is only unlocked at the point somebody decides to take you seriously.
Yes, and it is the point. You hand it a Vera ID, which is a name it can apply under. It cannot read anything with that name and it cannot unlock anything. Every application it files lands in a queue you work through, and approving is what opens the chosen fields to that one institution. If the assistant is careless or compromised, it was never holding anything readable.
No. A grant covers only the fields you picked, and the rest is not merely hidden from them, it is locked and they were never given the key. Most institutions start with a short preview so they can sort applications, and the full application is unlocked only if they decide to take you further and you agree at that moment.
It means somebody reviewed one of your claims and wrote down what they found. Today that reviewer is a member of Verigrant staff, and outside verification vendors are the next thing to be connected. An approved check comes back as a short note naming the kind of check, who ran it and the date, signed so that anybody can check it later with a key we publish. It says a review happened. It is not us saying that your application is true, and we never say that about anyone.
At signup you are given a recovery phrase and asked to write it down. With the phrase you can set a new password and keep everything. Without the password and without the phrase, the data is gone, permanently, and we cannot recover it either. We can give you your account back. We cannot give you your application back, because we never had a way in. That is the honest cost of the promise on the rest of this page.
Both, whenever you want. You can download the whole application as a file that unlocks with a phrase you choose, so your backup does not depend on us existing. You can also delete the account and everything under it. An application you cannot walk away from is not really yours.
Free forever for you, and free for any assistant acting for you. Institutions pay when they take a full application into their systems. The person whose data it is should not be the one paying for permission to hold it, and a layer funded by the people it protects would end up selling them out.
An hour now, and then it is done. If you want the other side of the story first, the institutions page says what a company receives and the security page says what we can and cannot do.
Free forever. Nobody reads a word of it, including us, until you say so.