iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
IETF Secure Asset Transfer Protocol (SATP) defines a gateway-to-gateway approach for coordinating asset transfers between distributed ledger networks. Hyperledger Cacti’s SATP Hermes is a documented software implementation of that approach, with gateway components, ledger integrations and a staged transfer workflow. The distinction matters: SATP remains an evolving standards-track effort, while Cacti’s documentation describes an implementation—not independent proof that it conforms to the latest draft.
What SATP coordinates—and what it does not
SATP is intended to help two networks coordinate an asset transfer when neither network can simply inspect or control the other’s internal state. A gateway represents each participating network, and the gateways exchange messages and evidence so the transfer can be audited by an authorized third party.
The model assumes that both networks share a common understanding of the asset. SATP does not make unlike ledgers semantically compatible, decide what an asset is worth, or replace each network’s local rules. A successful transfer is intended to leave the asset valid on only one network at a time: the origin-side asset is extinguished, commonly by burning it, and an equivalent asset is regenerated, commonly by minting it, on the destination side. The precise operations and proofs depend on the ledger and implementation.
The architecture frames desired behavior in terms of properties such as atomicity, consistency, isolation, durability, liveliness, safety and verifiable evidence. In operational terms, gateways must coordinate progress and handle a transfer that cannot complete, with commit or abort behavior and rollback support for failures in the middle of the process. The specification describes the goals; it does not prescribe a universal burn, mint or proof mechanism.
#1 Best Overall
Where the standards stood in the October 2026 document listings
The document versions and status below come from IETF records cited in the SATP document index and Datatracker. They are Internet-Drafts, not completed RFCs; Last Call is a stage in the standards process, not publication as a final RFC.
| Document | Revision and date | Listed status |
|---|---|---|
| SAT Interoperability Architecture | draft-ietf-satp-architecture-10, dated 15 September 2026 | The Datatracker listing described it as an active Internet-Draft with intended Informational status and IETF Last Call status. |
| SATP Core | draft-ietf-satp-core-17, dated 25 September 2026 | The SATP document index listed Last Call ending 9 October 2026. |
These are the statuses in the cited listings; they do not establish what changed after the listed Last Call date. Implementers should check the current IETF Datatracker record and document index before fixing a target revision, because draft text and status can change.
How Cacti’s SATP Hermes is organized
Hyperledger Cacti describes itself as a pluggable interoperability framework for heterogeneous distributed ledger and blockchain networks. Its documented use cases include cross-network asset transfers, swaps and ledger-state sharing, including across private or permissioned networks.
Recommended Free Tools
The official cactus-plugin-satp-hermes README presents Hermes as a software implementation of the IETF SATP protocol. It documents gateway and session management, cryptographic operations, audit logging, crash recovery, and integrations for Hyperledger Fabric and Ethereum/Besu. The project describes the architecture as extensible for additional ledgers. Its API separates application-to-gateway access from communication between gateways.
Rank #3
The architecture documentation describes a gateway orchestrator, SATP manager, cross-chain components, persistence and protocol stages. This is useful as a map of the project’s documented design, but project documentation alone does not establish independent conformance testing against the latest SATP draft.
How the documented Hermes transfer proceeds
The README labels four stages. The architecture page uses closely related labels, so treat the table as a summary of the project’s documented flow rather than a guarantee that message names or sequencing are unchanged across revisions.
Rank #4
| README stage | Documented purpose | Related architecture label |
|---|---|---|
| Stage 0: initialization | Establish a session and negotiate capabilities. | Transfer initiation |
| Stage 1: transfer agreement | Exchange asset details and establish agreement to proceed. | Transfer initiation |
| Stage 2: lock evidence | Lock the asset and generate and verify proof. | Lock assertion |
| Stage 3: commitment | Complete the transfer through the commitment process. | Commitment establishment and transfer completion |
The broader documented workflow includes source- and destination-ledger actions, proof exchange, rollback in failure cases and audit trails. When implementing or debugging an integration, use the exact core-draft revision and Hermes version you have selected to verify message names, ordering, evidence formats and ledger operations; the stage labels alone are not a wire-level specification.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
What Hermes documents about crash recovery
The Hermes README states assumptions for its recovery procedure. It assumes a gateway may crash after receiving a message but before sending the next one, that it has logged the previously received message, that it retains its long-term keys, that it does not behave in a Byzantine manner, and that it eventually recovers. The README also says the project intends to reduce these assumptions.
These are stated assumptions for the documented implementation, not guarantees supplied automatically by SATP. A deployment review should therefore check how the chosen version persists messages, protects and retains keys, resumes interrupted sessions, and handles gateways that are malicious or fail outside the described crash window.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to assess a Cacti SATP integration
Before treating a gateway pair as ready to move assets, evaluate the protocol revision, ledger behavior, failure handling and participant responsibilities together. A checklist helps separate questions that are often conflated:
- Draft alignment: Record the SATP core and architecture revisions the implementation targets, and how updates will be assessed as drafts change.
- Ledger capability: Confirm that each connector can perform the required local asset operations—such as locking, burning or minting—and expose the evidence needed by the other gateway. The documented Hermes integrations include Fabric and Ethereum/Besu; support for another ledger requires checking its actual adapter and operations.
- Transfer safety and evidence: Trace how the deployment implements lock, proof generation and verification, commit or abort, rollback, and audit evidence. Map those mechanisms to the intended safety properties rather than assuming that stage names prove them.
- Recovery: Verify persistent logging, key retention, recoverable crash points and behavior when a gateway does not meet the README’s assumptions.
- Operations and governance: Identify who operates each gateway, who can authorize transfers, how disputes and losses are handled, and what agreements bind the participating networks.
Where the protocol boundary ends
The IETF working-group overview describes common identifiers, message flows, payloads and terminology, and points to existing standards that may be reused. Its examples include TLS for secure channels; JSON or CBOR payloads; JOSE or COSE for signatures and encryption; PKIX certificates and JWT tokens; and possible use of W3C DIDs. These examples are not a complete implementation profile: a deployment must specify which options it actually supports and how peers negotiate or configure them.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Technical evidence and institutional authority are separate. The working-group overview says participating networks will likely need legal or other agreements, while those frameworks and proof of proper implementation are outside SATP’s scope. A protocol exchange can support verification of what gateways did; it does not by itself settle legal enforceability, liability, asset valuation, governance or each ledger’s rules.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
