Privacy
The credential model exists largely for privacy reasons. Those benefits are real but they are not automatic — an integration can give most of them away.
What the model provides
The verifier learns only what was presented. Selective disclosure means a holder can prove one claim without revealing the rest of the credential.
The issuer does not learn where a credential is used. A verifier checks a signature and a published status list. It does not call the issuer, so the issuer gets no log of who checked, when, or where.
No verifier-issuer relationship is needed. Which means no bilateral integration, and no data-sharing agreement to negotiate about what flows between them.
What can give it away
Asking for more than you need. A policy requesting a full profile when the decision needed one boolean has discarded the benefit of selective disclosure. The verifier now holds data it must protect.
Storing presentations. Keeping the payload "in case we need it" turns a verification into a personal-data store.
Correlating identifiers. If you record a stable subject identifier against every verification, you have built a log of that person's activity with you. Sometimes that is required; it should be a deliberate decision with a retention period, not a side effect of logging everything.
Logging claim values. Application logs are usually more widely readable and less well controlled than databases.
Practical guidance
Design each verification policy around one question. Store the answer and the verification identifier. Set a retention period and implement deletion. Log identifiers, never claim values.
Holder consent
Nothing is issued without the holder accepting the offer, and nothing is presented without them consenting to that presentation. Those steps happen in their wallet and cannot be driven from your server.
That is a feature, not an integration obstacle. An integration that tried to design around it would be trying to remove the holder's decision from a process that exists to give them one.
Regulatory position
DiligenceID does not make a regulatory compliance claim on your behalf. Whether your use meets a particular obligation depends on your jurisdiction, your sector and what you do with the data — questions this documentation cannot answer for you.
What it can tell you is what the platform does and does not retain, which is set out in credential data handling.