Crypto Software
TRENFRAR
Discuss Your Project
Architecture Library

Reference architectures for enterprise digital asset systems

Architecture frameworks that expose trust boundaries, service separation, integrations and operating models instead of relying on sales claims.

Book architecture sessionView case studies

Reference architecture domains

Each architecture is adapted during discovery to the institution, regulation and existing systems.

01

Custody Reference Architecture

Wallet tiers, HSM/MPC boundaries, policy engine, approvals and recovery.

Explore solution →
02

Exchange Reference Architecture

Separation of order, balance, wallet, market data, risk and operations services.

Explore solution →
03

RWA & Tokenization Architecture

Issuance, investor registry, lifecycle, transfer restrictions and integrations.

Explore solution →
04

Payment Architecture

QR/API flows, pricing, webhooks, reconciliation and merchant operations.

Explore solution →
05

Permissioned Blockchain

Nodes, permissioning, identity, indexing and enterprise integration.

Explore solution →
06

Enterprise Integration

API gateway, event bus, idempotency, observability and legacy adapters.

Explore solution →
Architecture principles

The rationale behind decisions matters more than the diagram.

Every design is evaluated with trust boundaries, failure modes, operating responsibility and handover model.

Trust boundaries
Threat model
API contracts
HA/DR
Observability
Deployment & rollback
REFERENCE FLOW

Trust boundaries define an architecture as much as services do.

Identity & RBACAuditObservabilityRecovery

Let’s review your architecture.

Bring the current system, integrations and target operating model to an engineering session.

Book architecture session
REFERENCE ARCHITECTURE

Institutional custody and digital-asset control plane

ChannelsWeb · Mobile · Back Office · Partner API
→
API GatewayAuth · Rate limit · Idempotency · WAF
→
Policy EngineRBAC · Maker/Checker · Limits · KYT hooks
→
Signing BoundaryHSM / MPC · Hot / Warm / Cold · Quorum
→
Blockchain LayerNode clusters · RPC · Indexers · Confirmation policy

The messaging layer can use enterprise event-bus technologies such as Kafka/RabbitMQ, while signing can be designed around HSM, MPC or hybrid models based on the client’s security and procurement requirements. This is a reference architecture and does not claim use of a particular vendor or protocol.

NETWORKS & STANDARDS

Architecture without lock-in to one chain or token standard

These are technology families that can be evaluated during solution scoping; this is not a claim that every item is pre-enabled in every project. Exact network, token-standard and integration scope is defined during technical discovery.

BitcoinEthereum / EVMSolanaCosmos SDKERC-20ERC-721 / 1155ERC-1400ERC-3643

MPC / key policy

Protocol families such as GG18/GG20/CMP and quorum models such as 2-of-3 or 3-of-5 are evaluated against the threat model, vendor selection, recovery design and client key-ownership requirements. Selection is documented through architecture decisions and acceptance criteria rather than implied as a universal implementation.

COMMERCIAL & DELIVERY MODEL

Not generic SaaS: productised enterprise engineering

Crypto Software delivers client-specific products on reusable engineering components and reference architectures. Source-code/IP transfer, on-prem/private-cloud deployment or managed operations are defined explicitly per engagement.

01 · Build & Transfer

Client-specific build with source, documentation, IaC and operating runbooks handed over after acceptance.

02 · Private Deployment

Deployment in the client data centre or private-cloud account; keys, data and infrastructure can remain client-owned.

03 · Managed Operations

Managed operations with explicitly scoped SLA, observability, incident/recovery and change management.

MODULAR ENTERPRISE CORE

Not a blank-sheet project: reference architecture + reusable core + client-specific integration

Source-code delivery does not mean rebuilding every system from scratch. Reusable policy, API, auditability, integration and operating components are adapted to client security, residency and process requirements. “Independently audited” is stated only where a verifiable report exists for the relevant version and scope.

OPERATIONS CONTROL PLANE

Reference UI for maker-checker and transaction monitoring

Approval QueueREFERENCE UI
PolicyTreasury-02Quorum2 of 3Risk StateReview
BTC withdrawal requestMaker submitted
Policy changeChecker required

This is a reference mockup illustrating the expected enterprise control-plane UX, not customer data or a claim of a live product screen.

SLA / RTO / RPO CONTRACT MATRIX

Resilience targets are architecture inputs, not marketing numbers

SLADefined contractually with scope and maintenance windowsRTOTargeted by service tier and DR topologyRPOTargeted by data class and replication modelDR TestVerified with failover/failback acceptance scenarios

Actual SLA, RTO and RPO values are committed only after deployment model, region count, database/replication design and client risk/budget requirements are defined. Unverified percentages or minute values are not published.

SEQUENCE & DATA FLOW

Transaction signing and approval flow

Client / Back Office→API Gateway→Policy Engine→Maker / Checker→HSM / MPC Boundary→Blockchain Node

Each step is designed to be traceable with correlation IDs, idempotency and audit events. Actual topology varies by client trust boundaries and residency requirements.

TRANSACTION AUTHORIZATION POLICY

Turn unauthorized-transfer risk into an enforceable decision flow

Transfer Requestasset · amount · destination→Policy Enginelimits · role · allowlist→KYT / Risk Hookprovider-neutral adapter→Maker / Checkerquorum · step-up approval→HSM / MPCsigning boundary

Example: a high-value or new-destination transaction can require extra approval, allowlist validation, risk checks or a time lock. Threshold values belong to client policy.