Summary

Imagine a fingerprint you can follow like a sequence — readable, traceable, attached to the sealing act. That is the idea behind “genomic cryptography”: an encoding metaphor, not laboratory DNA. In Seal Soft, this layer is called EviDNA™: a procedural proof that complements documentary signature formats without replacing them.

Definitions

TermIn plain words
EviDNA™Procedural proof technology delivered in Seal Soft, associated with sealing.
ACGT genomeSymbolic string in the A/C/G/T alphabet — a fingerprint represented differently, not a biological proof.
TrustSequenceTrust-sequence identifier that helps correlate sealing, verification and reports.
ManifestStructured sealing metadata: what you need to understand and verify the proof.

What is delivered — and what is not

StatusContent
DeliveredIn Seal Soft: EviDNA proof, ACGT genome, TrustSequence, manifest; local verification; local anchoring possible when working offline.
ConceptRepresenting a procedural fingerprint with a “genetic” alphabet to make it more readable and traceable, alongside PAdES, CAdES and XAdES.
RoadmapFurther Soft evolutions may follow the current scope — without presenting them here as available.
Limits / Not availableNo live Gateway integration; not an eIDAS QES substitute; not file encryption; not a legal identity.
Document PAdES/CAdES/XAdES EviDNA proof Verification Complementary layers — EviDNA proof does not replace the documentary signature
Figure — complementary layers (educational).

ACGT encoding

The A/C/G/T alphabet is a symbolic encoding. A derived fingerprint becomes a sequence the eye can follow — useful for traceability, misleading if you think you are reading laboratory DNA. It is neither a forensic genetic proof nor a biological identity card.

In practice, Soft derives this sequence from a cryptographic seed and, depending on the scenario, workstation context signals. The essential point for the reader: the metaphor helps understanding; it does not create a medical proof.

Proof, TrustSequence, manifest

Three pieces complement each other in Soft. The EviDNA proof is the procedural layer attached to sealing — a badge or QR may accompany it. The TrustSequence is the thread between the act, verification and reports. The manifest gathers the metadata useful to understand what was sealed and how to check it.

When the network is unavailable, Soft can rely on local anchoring: the proof remains verifiable on the workstation, without inventing a remote timestamp authority.

Proof ≠ signature ≠ encryption ≠ identity

NotionRoleEviDNA ?
Signature (PAdES/CAdES/XAdES)Cryptographic commitment on the document via a certificateComplementary
EviDNA proofProcedural layer, traceability, anchoringYes (Soft)
EncryptionContent confidentialityNo (different goal)
Legal identity / QESeIDAS regulatory valueNo — QTSP required for a QES

Examples

You seal a PDF with PAdES, then you check in Soft both the documentary signature and the EviDNA layer. You work offline: local anchoring takes over. You open the manifest to find the TrustSequence and sealing metadata. Three gestures, one requirement: know what you are asserting.

Good practices

Keep procedural proof separate from a qualified signature requirement. Keep verification reports with the document. And never present the ACGT genome as a biomedical proof — the metaphor stops where biology begins.

Common mistakes

Confusing EviDNA with a public certification authority or with ACME. Treating the TrustSequence as a legal identity. Claiming EviDNA is “live” in Gateway when Soft is the delivered scope today. Three common shortcuts — three reasons to return to the status table.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions are gathered on the dedicated page:  EviDNA™ FAQ.

Definitions:  glossary · certificate · TLS · PKI · EviDNA.

Glossary

The site’s terminology reference is the CertiShielder™ glossary (stable anchors).

To go further

To compare proof and documentary signature, read PAdES, CAdES and XAdES. For the regulatory caveat, see sealing and qualified signature. For the product philosophy, read Why CertiShielder. If you are evaluating Soft, start from the demonstrable scope — and the official sources below.

Sources