Skip to content

Candidate Protocols

This page tracks the current shortlist, the safest likely software role for us, and the first-pass IP or licensing concerns.

This is a research and product-planning note, not legal advice and not a claim of official conformance to any external standard.

Value Proposition Filter

The candidate is interesting only if peer-owned state changes the trust story.

Look for:

  • multiple peers with distinct fact authority
  • a high-value shared claim
  • negative evidence such as non-revocation, non-dispute, or no active hold
  • selective disclosure pressure
  • audit or dispute replay value
  • certifications that can be reused downstream

If the candidate only needs one signed document, it is probably not a PPP candidate.

How To Read This

  • Merkle fit is about protocol shape, not market size.
  • Role is the safest software position for us if we want to avoid becoming the official operator of somebody else's network.
  • IP or license risk is only about protocol texts, software licenses, trademarks, and related governance.
  • Main non-license risk captures the bigger operational constraint when the licensing story is not the real problem.
  • Standards-backed candidates and internal sketches are separated because they have different evidence quality.

Safe Default Roles

Across most standards-backed candidates, the safest roles are:

  • peer-side toolkit or SDK
  • verifier or policy engine
  • internal middleware for one participant
  • adapter that emits or consumes standard messages without claiming authority
  • proof-bundle or certification layer that leaves protocol governance intact

The risky roles are:

  • accredited access point, service provider, or registry operator
  • official conformance or certification authority
  • republisher of standards text, schemas, or branded documentation
  • legal title, escrow, or adjudication operator where the surrounding framework governs that function

Standards-Backed Shortlist

Candidate Merkle fit Likely role IP or license risk Main non-license risk
GS1 EPCIS Excellent Peer event publisher, verifier, certification layer Medium Adoption and conformance claims
DCSA Track and Trace Strong Carrier or shipper integration and verifier Medium Cross-party trust and conformance expectations
DCSA Bill of Lading Strong eBL state engine or verifier for one participant or platform Medium Legal interoperability and title-control process
Peppol Post-Award Strong Buyer or supplier middleware and validator Medium-High Access point accreditation and network governance
Peppol Pre-Award Strong Tendering-side packager and verifier Medium-High Procurement-law and accreditation requirements
SWIFT Documentary Credits Medium Internal bank or corporate tooling High Banking regulation and network contracts
in-toto Excellent Attestation producer, verifier, certification layer Low Differentiation from adjacent provenance tooling
W3C VC Status Lists Excellent Issuer, holder, verifier, or status publisher toolkit Low Wallet and format fragmentation
OpenID4VC Medium Wallet, issuer, verifier transport layer Low Profile churn and interoperability details
Hyperledger AnonCreds Excellent Privacy-preserving credential toolkit Low Crypto and interoperability complexity
Hyperledger Aries Medium Agent-to-agent transport and workflow layer Low Agent complexity and protocol sprawl
Cardano Governance Strong Governance client, wallet, verifier, metadata tooling Low Social legitimacy and evolving conventions

Protocol Families

These are not one externally governed protocol, but they are useful families for research and product design.

Candidate Merkle fit Likely role IP or license risk Main non-license risk
Compliance Audit-Signoff Strong Evidence workflow and certification tooling Low Regulatory and marketing claims
Dispute Resolution Strong Evidence bundle and arbitrator tooling Low Legal-service and evidence-handling obligations
Independent Journalism Strong Endorsement and verification toolkit, not registry Low Becoming a centralized arbiter of journalistic legitimacy

Internal Sketches

These pages are hypothesis sketches used to test protocol shape. They are not source-backed external protocol analyses yet.

Sketch Why it matters
Software Provenance A compact example of multi-peer build, review, and deployment evidence
Milestone Settlement Clear composition ladder from delivery, QA, acceptance, and dispute exclusion
Custody Handoff Chain-of-custody and negative possession claims are natural PPP pressure points
Credential Lifecycle Revocation, selective disclosure, and non-revocation proofs are central

Current Read

The strongest low-friction places to explore first are:

  • in-toto for software provenance and certification facts
  • GS1 EPCIS for non-software supply-chain events
  • W3C VC Status Lists and Hyperledger AnonCreds for exclusion-heavy credential protocols

The most interesting but highest-friction candidates are:

  • Peppol
  • DCSA eBL
  • SWIFT documentary credits

They are attractive because the business pain is real, but they carry more governance, accreditation, legal-process, or network-participation baggage than the proof protocol alone.

Next Step

Use the Protocol Evaluation Sheet before opening a new spec. A candidate should not advance unless its value proposition, proof needs, software role, and infrastructure path are all clear.