Summary: Most supply chain traceability programs stall at “pilot purgatory” because they try to replace existing systems instead of instrumenting them. This post lays out a pragmatic, EPCIS 2.0–first architecture that adds cryptographic assurance, privacy via ZK, and low-cost public anchoring—so you can satisfy FSMA 204, DSCSA, and EU Battery/DPP obligations while improving working capital and recall precision.

Blockchain for Supply Chain: Track and Trace Architectures

Target audience: Enterprise (CPG/F&B, Pharma, Electronics, Automotive). Keywords: SOC 2, ISO 27001, EPCIS 2.0/CBV 2.0.1, GS1 Digital Link, FSMA 204, DSCSA, EU Battery Passport/DPP, W3C DID/VC, Zero-Knowledge Proofs, Ethereum EIP-4844.

— Written by a Senior Engineer, 7Block Labs

Pain — The specific technical headache you’re feeling

• Your EPCIS 1.2 feeds and EDI 856/940/945 messages don’t align with how regulators want to see “CTEs/KDEs by TLC” (Traceability Lot Code). FSMA 204 demands you generate an electronic, sortable spreadsheet within 24 hours; meanwhile, internal data lives in separate WMS/MES/ERP silos with inconsistent semantics. Miss one hop and you broaden a recall from two pallets to two weeks of production. The FDA makes the 24‑hour response explicit for covered foods. (fda.gov)
• You postponed serialization/traceability because “regulators keep extending deadlines.” That is true—but costly. FDA created a DSCSA stabilization period, then provided staggered exemptions through 2025–2026; if you wait for the last exemption to expire, you’re building under time pressure while wholesalers and 3PLs are already enforcing package‑level interoperability in procurement. (fda.gov)
• Your European business is asking about Digital Product Passports. The Battery Regulation mandates passports for EV/industrial/LMT batteries from February 18, 2027; ESPR generalizes DPP expectations across more categories. If your master data isn’t GS1-aligned and queryable, expect customs friction and retail chargebacks. (batteryregulation.eu)
• Cost anxiety: “Public chains are too expensive.” Post‑Dencun, EIP‑4844 blobs let rollups post short‑lived data cheaply (blobs ~128 KB each; target 3 blobs per beacon block; pruning ~4096 epochs ≈ 18 days). Anchoring Merkle roots of daily EPCIS batches now costs orders of magnitude less than historical calldata. (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• Privacy vs. compliance: Your suppliers won’t expose their full sub-tier network. Without privacy, adoption stalls. ZK approaches can prove “this batch satisfied policy P and maintained custody integrity” without revealing counterparties. Early frameworks and academic work validate feasibility at enterprise throughput. (arxiv.org)

Agitation — What’s at risk if this drags on

• Missed regulatory windows: Even with FSMA 204’s proposed enforcement deferral to July 20, 2028, the 24‑hour records expectation is unchanged, and brands are moving ahead to avoid liability. Leaving this to 2027 means paying rush premiums to retrofit every supplier connection. (fda.gov)
• Retail and cross‑border friction: GS1 UK warns that companies unprepared for DPP risk EU trade impacts; procurement will start including DPP/EPCIS clauses well before the legal cliff. (thetimes.co.uk)
• Recall blast radius: Without TLC‑linked CTEs, your containment is imprecise. Walmart demonstrated going from days to seconds to trace provenance once the data model and network were in place. That speed is not “nice to have”—it is the difference between a targeted withdrawal and a multi‑SKU purge. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
• Cost of inaction: Gartner has tracked two persistent patterns—(a) reconfiguration toward resilience is underway across the board, and (b) “pilot purgatory” remains a risk for teams who treat blockchain as a platform replacement rather than a standards‑aligned data assurance layer. (gartner.com)

Solution — 7Block’s architecture and delivery methodology

We don’t “rip and replace.” We make your current systems provable.

1. Data model first: GS1 EPCIS 2.0/CBV 2.0.1

• Capture and Query APIs are standardized; EPCIS 2.0 enables JSON/JSON‑LD, REST/OpenAPI, and sensor telemetry. We start by normalizing your CTEs/KDEs (receive, transform, ship, etc.) into EPCIS events with GTIN/SGTIN, locations (GLN), and TLCs. (gs1.org)
• We deploy an OSS‑friendly EPCIS repository (e.g., OpenEPCIS) alongside your ERP/WMS/MES to ingest events via connectors. These toolchains include identifier translators (URN⇄GS1 Digital Link), version converters (1.2⇄2.0), and event hash generators. (openepcis.io)
• For brands with consumer UX, we adopt GS1 Digital Link and GS1 Digital Signatures to sign links/labels—useful for anti‑tamper and counterfeit defense. (github.com)

1. Hybrid ledger pattern: permissioned for data, public for integrity

• Permissioned layer: Hyperledger Fabric or Besu for consortium‑grade throughput and private channels. Event payloads stay off‑chain in your EPCIS repository; the chain only holds references and policy state.
• Public anchor: We batch EPCIS event hashes per facility/day into a Merkle root and anchor it on an EVM L2 using EIP‑4844 blob‑carry transactions. Blobs are pruned (~18 days), but KZG commitments remain and prove the data existed. This achieves cheap anchoring while maintaining auditability. (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• Why this matters: Regulators or partners can independently verify that your EPCIS record (and thus your 24‑hour spreadsheet) wasn’t altered after the fact—without seeing the underlying proprietary data.

1. Privacy by design with Zero‑Knowledge

• We compile ZK circuits to prove “chain‑of‑custody correctness” and “policy compliance” without revealing counterparties or prices. Typical circuits:
  • Custody proof: The prover demonstrates a continuous path of ObjectEvents/AggregationEvents for a TLC across time windows and locations in an allow‑list, with cryptographic links to the day’s anchored Merkle root.
  • Content bounds: Range proofs on sensor telemetry (e.g., cold‑chain temperature stayed within thresholds).
  • Certificate possession: VC‑backed attestations (e.g., organic, GMP) proven in ZK, so buyers see “valid” without seeing the actual certificate file.
• References and prior art show low overhead when proofs are computed off-chain and only verifications hit the chain. We favor modern proving systems (Plonk/Halo2) and Poseidon hash in‑circuit for performance. (arxiv.org)

1. Enterprise identity and attestations (no vendor lock‑in)

• We use W3C DIDs and Verifiable Credentials 2.0 so a supplier’s “who signed this event?” is cryptographically verifiable and portable across ecosystems. The VC 2.0 family became W3C Recommendation in May 2025; DID Core is a 2022 W3C Recommendation. (w3.org)
• Practically: your suppliers sign EPCIS events with keys bound to their DID; credentials (GFSI, ISO 22000, GDP, etc.) are presented/verified at onboarding and can be proven with ZK when sensitive.

1. Compliance mappings that de‑risk procurement

• FSMA 204: We configure event types, TLC assignments, and a report job that renders the 24‑hour sortable spreadsheet on demand. Even with the proposed compliance deferral to July 20, 2028, the requirement to furnish records within 24 hours remains; we design to that bar. (fda.gov)
• DSCSA: Package‑level identifiers, interoperable exchange, and suspect/illegitimate product workflows mapped to EPCIS events, with exemptions timelines considered for rollout phases across manufacturers, wholesalers, and dispensers. (fda.gov)
• EU Battery Passport/DPP: We generate a DPP‑ready data service (QR resolvable) embedding GS1 identifiers and EPCIS provenance, aligned to Battery Regulation milestones starting Feb 18, 2027 (LMT/industrial >2 kWh/EV). (batteryregulation.eu)
• Security & audit: We meet SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 controls expectations; support SSO (SAML/OIDC), role‑based entitlements, HSM/MPC for key custody, and evidence‑ready change logs.

1. Cost control: use “blobs” the right way

• Anchoring strategy: Per site/day, we target a single anchor that covers thousands to millions of events via a Merkle tree; proofs bind spreadsheets back to that root. Rollups’ blob fee market targets three blobs per block; blobs are 128 KB and pruned after ~18 days, making this cheap and storage‑friendly. (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• If you need full L1 anchoring for specific markets, we support periodic L1 checkpoints (e.g., weekly) with most commits on L2.

1. Delivery: “90‑Day Pilot → 9‑Month Rollout”

• Day 0–15: Data assessment and EPCIS 2.0 mapping for one product family, one DC, two suppliers.
• Day 16–45: Deploy OpenEPCIS + connectors, signers (DID/VC), and the daily anchor contract on an L2.
• Day 46–75: ZK PoC—prove custody continuity on a chosen lot; regulator‑style view for 24‑hour spreadsheet plus verification against the Merkle root.
• Day 76–90: Procurement package—TCO, success metrics, SOW, change‑management plan, SOC 2/ISO controls mapping.

Related services if you need them:

• End‑to‑end implementation and integration: see our web3 development services and blockchain integration.
• Full-stack builds and orchestration: our custom blockchain development services and cross-chain solutions.
• Smart contracts and reviews: smart contract development with security audit services.
• App layer and partner portals: dApp development and asset management platform development.

Practical example — What this looks like in your stack

Scenario: Fresh produce to a national grocer, FSMA 204 covered.

• Ingestion
  • DC scanners (SGTIN, batch, expiry) → EPCIS ObjectEvents (readPoint=GLN, bizStep=receiving) with TLC assignment; IoT probes feed sensor data into EPCIS 2.0 sensor extensions.
  • Supplier app signs each shipment’s EPCIS bundle using its DID key; a VC asserts their GFSI certificate (optionally proven in ZK to hide certificate details). (w3.org)
• Repository
  • OpenEPCIS handles capture/query, JSON‑LD context, and GS1 Digital Link conversion; a nightly job builds a Merkle tree of that day’s event hashes per DC. (openepcis.io)
• Anchor
  • A batcher submits the Merkle root to an Anchor contract via a blob‑carrying transaction on an Ethereum L2. Blob holds the day’s OpenAPI attestations and a compact proof index; KZG commitment persists even after blob pruning. (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• Audit
  • On an FDA request, your system exports the 24‑hour spreadsheet. The verifier tool recomputes the Merkle leaf for each row and checks it against the anchored root. If you selectively disclose, a ZK proof demonstrates custody continuity and temperature compliance without revealing every intermediate GLN.

A lightweight Solidity skeleton for the anchor:

// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
pragma solidity ^0.8.24;

contract EpcisDailyAnchor {
    // siteId => day (YYYYMMDD) => merkle root
    mapping(bytes32 => mapping(uint32 => bytes32)) public roots;
    event Anchored(bytes32 indexed siteId, uint32 indexed yyyymmdd, bytes32 merkleRoot);

    function anchor(bytes32 siteId, uint32 yyyymmdd, bytes32 merkleRoot) external {
        require(roots[siteId][yyyymmdd] == 0x0, "already anchored");
        roots[siteId][yyyymmdd] = merkleRoot;
        emit Anchored(siteId, yyyymmdd, merkleRoot);
    }
}

We pair this with:

• EIP‑712 typed data for off‑chain signatures on EPCIS bundles, so procurement/QA can verify signers without touching the chain.
• A verifier microservice that accepts your spreadsheet, recomputes hashes, and emits a signed attestation “data matches anchored root.”

Best emerging practices we recommend

• EPCIS 2.0 everywhere, one interface at a time: Upgrade edge capture (handhelds, scales, PLCs) to produce EPCIS. Use the GS1 JSON‑LD context and REST OpenAPI to keep integrations predictable. (ref.gs1.org)
• Don’t store payloads on chain: store hashes + minimal proofs; keep the content in your EPCIS repository with proper retention and access controls (SOC 2/ISO 27001 evidence).
• Keep suppliers in control of their data: Issue DIDs, collect VCs, and allow ZK proofs in lieu of raw documents whenever possible. This increases onboarding acceptance. (w3.org)
• Anchor often, verify selectively: Daily/site‑level anchors hit the sweet spot between cost and assurance. If a recall occurs, you can prove non‑repudiation for the exact spreadsheet you submitted.
• Plan for EU DPP/Battery Passport now: Build your product data service so a QR resolves to a signed Digital Link record and a DPP payload that cites EPCIS provenance. Batteries will need passports by Feb 18, 2027; other categories will follow under ESPR. (batteryregulation.eu)
• Use blobs, not calldata: For rollups, blob‑carry transactions drastically reduce data availability costs; they’re pruned after ~18 days, with commitments remaining for verification. (docs.teku.consensys.io)

Proof — What outcomes look like on the ground

• Trace speed: Walmart’s mango pilot cut origin lookup from ~7 days to 2.2 seconds; when your data model is consistent (GS1/EPCIS) and you anchor integrity, recall scoping becomes a query, not a fire drill. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
• Regulatory readiness without guesswork:
  • FSMA 204: Even with the proposed compliance date change to July 20, 2028, we configure the mandated 24‑hour response (sortable spreadsheet, intact links) today. (fda.gov)
  • DSCSA: Program to the 2025–2026 exemptions schedule so manufacturers/wholesalers/dispensers hit package‑level interoperability; stop scrambling at audits. (fda.gov)
  • EU Battery Passport/DPP: Ship DPP artifacts bound to GS1 and EPCIS; avoid EU border friction starting Feb 18, 2027. (batteryregulation.eu)
• Procurement‑safe delivery: 7Block’s approach fits into your S2P and infosec gates—SOC 2/ISO 27001 controls, SSO, role‑based access, and evidence‑friendly logs—without demanding ERP replacement.
• GTM metrics we commit to in pilots:
  • Time‑to‑first‑trace: <30 days from data mapping to first verifiable custody proof on a target SKU/DC.
  • 24‑hour packet readiness: push‑button export + Merkle verification within 60 days.
  • Supplier onboarding: <2 hours to first signed EPCIS bundle (DID key issued + event capture), with <15‑minute QR‑based invite flow for long tail.
  • Cost per anchor: sub‑dollar per site/day on major L2s post‑4844; weekly L1 checkpoints optional for internal policy. (Mechanics and fee market documented in 4844; we size exact costs with you during pilot.) (ethereum.org)
• Business impact (directional baselines you can validate in your P&L):
  • Recall precision: Cut recalled volume by 10–30% by narrowing lots via TLC‑linked CTEs; in food, that can mean multi‑million‑dollar savings per event. (ibm.com)
  • Working capital: With shared, trustworthy inventory events, many networks carry 10% less safety stock; the freed cash is material at enterprise scale. (Trend consistent with industry analyses of over‑buffering due to poor visibility.) (gartner.com)
  • Supplier compliance: Faster verifications (VC/ZK) reduce cycle time in onboarding and audits, and move you out of spreadsheet‑chasing.

What we’ll deliver, concretely

• EPCIS 2.0 repository with REST/OpenAPI, JSON‑LD context, and GS1 Digital Link conversion; integrations to your ERP/WMS/MES and scanners. (ref.gs1.org)
• Anchor contract on an EVM L2 with daily site‑roots; independent verifier tool that binds your FSMA 204 spreadsheet back to the anchored root. (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• DID/VC‑based supplier identity; optional ZK proofs for custody and policy compliance to protect trade secrets while satisfying audits. (w3.org)
• A procurement‑ready package: architecture, runbooks, SOC 2/ISO 27001 mappings, SLAs, and TCO.

If you need a broader buildout (portals, mobile capture, cross‑chain routing, fundraising for a consortium), we can extend with:

• cross-chain solutions development
• blockchain bridge development
• token development services
• fundraising

Closing note

The fastest path out of “pilot purgatory” is to stop boiling the ocean. Adopt EPCIS 2.0 as the lingua franca; prove integrity cheaply with 4844 anchors; preserve privacy with ZK; and map outputs to the exact regulatory artifacts procurement and regulators expect.

Book a 90-Day Pilot Strategy Call.

References and sources for specific claims:

• EPCIS 2.0 features (JSON‑LD, REST/OpenAPI) and artefacts; OpenEPCIS toolchain. (gs1.org)
• Walmart/IBM traceability result (2.2 seconds). (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
• FSMA 204 24‑hour requirement; proposed enforcement deferral to July 20, 2028. (fda.gov)
• DSCSA stabilization period and exemptions timelines. (fda.gov)
• EU Battery Passport/DPP timelines and ESPR context. (batteryregulation.eu)
• EIP‑4844 blob mechanics (size, pruning, target blobs/block). (docs.teku.consensys.io)
• ZK privacy in supply chains (PrivChain/TradeChain). (arxiv.org)
• W3C DID Core (2022 Rec) and VC 2.0 (2025 Recs). (w3.org)