Proof of personhood · Proof of personhood
Idena vs Proof of Humanity
Idena (proof-of-person blockchain with flip puzzles) and Proof of Humanity (video registry with crypto-economic challenges) both aim at sybil resistance, but they disagree on 4 of 12 measurable attributes. This page compares them field by field from published protocol behaviour — no marketing scores, no invented metrics.
Idena
Idena makes personhood a consensus role: identities revalidate on a fixed schedule by solving puzzles simultaneously. Strong equality guarantees, high ongoing user effort.
Openness 9/10
Proof of Humanity
Proof of Humanity trades privacy for adversarial auditability: registrations are public videos anyone can challenge with a deposit. Sybil resistance is enforced economically.
Openness 9/10
Attribute comparison
| Attribute | Idena | Proof of Humanity |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Proof of personhood | Proof of personhood |
| Network | Idena (own network) | Ethereum / Gnosis |
| How a person is proven | Synchronised validation ceremonies solving human-only flip puzzles | Public video submission, vouching, and dispute resolution via Kleros arbitration |
| Biometric data | None collected | None collected |
| KYC requirement | No KYC | No KYC |
| Hardware needed | Any phone or laptop | Any phone or laptop |
| Key custody | User holds the keys | User holds the keys |
| Reputation model | Binary human / not human | Binary human / not human |
| Native token | iDNA | None |
| Public read API | Yes | Yes |
| Open source core | Yes | Yes |
| Who can revoke you | Missing a validation ceremony downgrades or kills the identity status | Anyone can challenge a registration; arbitration decides removal |
4 of 12 attributes differ; 8 are identical.
Openness criteria, scored openly
The matrix scores what a protocol asks of a user and how much of the result stays verifiable in public. It is not a quality, security or market ranking, and it is not derived from TrustLayer trust scores.
| Criterion | Idena | Proof of Humanity |
|---|---|---|
| No biometric collectionmax 2 | 2/2 — None collected | 2/2 — None collected |
| No KYC requirementmax 2 | 2/2 — No KYC | 2/2 — No KYC |
| No specialised hardwaremax 1 | 1/1 — Any phone or laptop | 1/1 — Any phone or laptop |
| User-held keysmax 2 | 2/2 — User holds the keys | 2/2 — User holds the keys |
| Continuous reputationmax 1 | 0/1 — Binary human / not human | 0/1 — Binary human / not human |
| Public read APImax 1 | 1/1 — Documented public endpoints | 1/1 — Documented public endpoints |
| Open source coremax 1 | 1/1 — Core implementation is public | 1/1 — Core implementation is public |
| Total | 9/10 | 9/10 |
Best fit for Idena
- Experiments needing one-node-one-person consensus
- Users willing to attend scheduled validation ceremonies
Best fit for Proof of Humanity
- Governance systems that want an adversarial, publicly auditable registry
- Communities comfortable with public video identity
Verdict
On the openness criteria below, Idena scores 9/10 and Proof of Humanity scores 9/10 — 4 of 12 attributes differ. Idena asks less of the user up front; Proof of Humanity offers a stronger external anchor where its trust assumptions are acceptable. Pick by what you must not collect, and by whether you need a one-off human check or a score that keeps moving.
Frequently asked questions
What is the main difference between Idena and Proof of Humanity?▼
Network: Idena — Idena (own network); Proof of Humanity — Ethereum / Gnosis.
Does Idena or Proof of Humanity require biometrics or KYC?▼
Idena: none collected, no kyc. Proof of Humanity: none collected, no kyc.
Which one can a developer query from an API?▼
Idena and Proof of Humanity
Can Idena and Proof of Humanity be used together?▼
Yes. They produce independent signals, so apps commonly combine a personhood check with a continuous reputation score before granting access or rewards.
Check a wallet against TrustLayer now
Trust scores, verifier counts and score factors are public and queryable — one request, no key required for read endpoints.
Keep reading