Selective-Disclosure in Decentralised Identity: A Comparative Evaluation of BBS+ and SD-JWT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic literature review compares two leading selective-disclosure primitives for decentralised identity-BBS+ signatures and Selective-Disclosure JSON Web Tokens (SD-JWT)-to clarify their suitability for privacypreserving credentials. Following Kitchenham's protocol, 226 records from 2017-2025 were screened across IEEE, ACM, SpringerLink, ScienceDirect, IETF and W3C repositories, yielding 31 primary studies with empirical data. Quantitative synthesis shows that BBS+ derived proofs remain constant-size at roughly 140 bytes and verify in about 12 ms on consumer hardware, whereas SD-JWT presentations grow with the number of revealed claims but still verify in under 10 ms for typical twoclaim use cases. Qualitative analysis confirms BBS+ provides strong unlinkability, predicate proofs and zero-knowledge disclosure, while SD-JWT offers seamless integration with existing JOSE/OAuth infrastructures yet carries correlation risk due to stable salted digests. Standardisation progress is comparable: the BBS+ cryptosuite reached W3C Candidate Recommendation in April 2025, and SD-JWT is in late-stage IETF review. The review concludes that privacy-critical scenarios such as age-gated services favour BBS+, whereas high-throughput web applications benefit from SD-JWT; consequently, hybrid wallet support for both formats is recommended. Future research should tackle scalable revocation, post-quantum migration and multi-credential aggregation to sustain long-term trust and interoperability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".