Signia Hard Rejected

Why was my platform rejected, could someone help me and explain what aspects did not meet Envato’s standards? The only thing I have found is that there can be multiple reasons for rejection, but that doesn’t give me any guidance on what I should improve. This is my first article that I am uploading to the platform and it is about a system of electronic signature of documents with digital certificates. In many countries, this is legally accepted.

My system, although initially it does not meet the specific requirements of any particular country for external use, it is suitable for internal use. If you want to use it externally, it is an excellent basis that can be adapted as required by law. Could this be the reason for the rejection, or are there other factors at play? To me, it is not feasible to redo the platform and try again without knowing the reason for the rejection. Also, maybe I didn’t look hard enough, but I didn’t find a similar article on Envato.

Sorry, I forgot to attach some screenshots.


Hard to say because you only shared screenshots. To get any meaningful response here, you will need to share a link to your project.

Based on the screenshot, i dont think the design is bad. But design is not the only thing they review.

Thanks for the answer, tomorrow I will publish my project in a url that you can verify. :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

If you didn’t submit a working url then the chances are that the item was not even reviewed properly and just hard rejected by default.

Given the sensitive nature of what the item does you will need to demonstrate how/where documents are saved and that it is sufficiently secure

Assuming that there’re already free alternatives, I don’t think this project would get approval as “premium” item.

Here is the link to the platform: Link

The login credentials are: Email: main@user.com Password: password

The password for the intermediate certificate is: 123456789

This is the private key of the user I shared with you. Copy the text and save it in a file with the .key extension.

-----BEGIN ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY-----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-----END ENCRYPTED PRIVATE KEY-----

This file is the key to decrypt the document and sign new ones.
The password is: 123456789

Could someone please help me see why it was rejected?

Your platform sounds like a good solution for documents with electronic signatures, especially with its use of digital certificates. However, I wonder if there may have been some confusion about the core functionality of your software. Is it primarily just a document storage and encrypted file system, or does it offer additional premium features like document signing, public access via short URLs, or protected pages? Clarifying these features could help make your platform’s purpose more clear and potentially align it better with Envato’s standards. Keep up the good work—this is definitely a promising project.

@peryel Thanks!

Signia allows the signing and storage of documents. Imagine the following:

You work in a company with a lot of paperwork.
1: Log in to Signia using your credentials provided by the company.

2: You create a certificate request by entering a password. Signia securely generates a private key locally, which you must store securely.

3: Your company authorizes the request (your certificate is generated), allowing you to upload and sign documents.

4: You upload a document that needs your superior’s approval (if it is confidential, you can encrypt it). You add the reviewers of the document and the people who must sign it.

5: The reviewer approves the document, and the signers use their private key to decrypt it (if encrypted) and/or sign it.

6: The signed document can be downloaded along with an XML file that will help verify the authenticity of the signatures and the integrity of the document.

Each document can be accessed through its own URL.

I think it’s too simple, you need at least a landing page with some more images and a lot more text.

The fact that there is so little text (with some awkard English usage) makes me think that your item documentation is probably not up to Envato standards.

English issues:

  • “Signers” should be “Signatories”
  • “Complete solution for Sign and manage documents” should be either “to sign and manage” or “for signing and managing”.
  • Access now and simplify your document management!” should be either “Join now” or “Get access now”.
  • Created on” should be “created at”.

I will now give you some more feedback based on ChatGPT responses:

Prompt: Why is this sentence awkard? “This verifier is a tool that allows anyone to independently verify the integrity of an electronically signed document on the platform and the authenticity of its signatures.”
Response

The sentence is awkward because it is long and has a complex structure that makes it harder to follow. Here are some specific issues:

  1. Redundant phrasing: “is a tool that allows” can be simplified to “allows” without losing meaning.
  2. Heavy noun phrases: “the integrity of an electronically signed document on the platform and the authenticity of its signatures” is a mouthful, making the sentence difficult to parse.
  3. Ambiguous reference: “on the platform” could modify “document” or “verify,” leading to potential confusion.

Suggested Revision:

“This verifier allows anyone to independently confirm both the integrity of an electronically signed document and the authenticity of its signatures on the platform.”

This version is clearer, more concise, and easier to read.

Prompt: Why is this sentence awkard? “Upload a document to request signatures”
Response

The sentence is awkward because it sounds somewhat vague and slightly unnatural in phrasing. Here’s why:

  1. Lack of a Clear Subject – It’s unclear who is uploading the document. Is it directed at the user (“You should upload…”), or is it a general statement?
  2. Verb Choice & Flow – “To request signatures” feels a bit clunky because “requesting signatures” is a secondary action dependent on uploading. The phrasing could be more natural.

Possible Fixes:

  • “Upload a document to get it signed.” (More direct and natural)
  • “Upload a document to request a signature.” (More precise if requesting just one)
  • “Upload a document to collect signatures.” (If multiple signatures are needed)

Prompt: Why is this sentence awkard? “The document format must be PDF and less than 20MB”
Response

The sentence is awkward because “PDF” is a file format, while “less than 20MB” refers to file size. The two elements are not parallel, making the sentence feel unbalanced.

A clearer revision would be:
“The document must be in PDF format and smaller than 20MB.”

This maintains parallelism between “in PDF format” and “smaller than 20MB,” making it more natural.

I could on to cover basically your entire project, but I think you get the picture. AI can help you on reviewing your project, if you ask the right questions.

@Honeyside

Your observations are important.

English is not my natural language for that reason I used the AI for some translations, with the observations you make I understand that the AI did not help me much in this aspect.

Is there someone from Envato who can clearly tell me what I need to fix before I try again?

1 Like

You won’t get feedback from reviewers here unless it’s soft rejected as it creates too much potential confusion and subsequent further delays/rejection.

It’s been said above but there’s a lot of free alternatives out there so you have to bring a) premium quality design and execution and b) something that warrants someone paying to install and use it vs the existing alternatives

While I appreciate there are other similar items for sale - personally I would be very suspicious of a bikes that uses a stock, sub $100 item to manage potentially very confidential and legally binding documents esp when support and updates are not guaranteed.

The keys etc you have help secure it but equally some of this feels over engineered and complex given how straightforward this process can be when you look at how tools like Adobe manage it.

The translations have been significantly improved.

It’s not about the translation or other issues has been stated here, the main reason:

After re-submitting the item, you’d still get the rejection.

Could you please share a link or the name of a system that does the same thing?"

Google “electronic signature free” or “electronic signature”
Google also has “Google eSignature” , supposed to be free.

1 Like

@ki-themes

Thanks for your response! I think there might be some confusion about how my system works, and I might not have explained it well. Let me share a few examples of what Signia is.

Validator screenshot

I’m not saying there aren’t systems out there that do this—maybe with a deep search you could find some—but most of the systems you’ll come across, even here on Envato, use handwritten signatures drawn on a canvas or scanned images.

1 Like

I thought hand written scanned signatures (regardless of the keys, xml etc.) were not deemed legal on digital contracts?

As said above this just feels unnecessary over engineered. If the giant brands like adobe or doc u sign get away without the need for additional steps or validation then it raises a question about the need for that.