Digital identity for real products
Digital identity for medicines: one QR per unit, from production to public lookup.
Workspace
Illustrative daily lookups; these are not usage measurements.
Example qualitative status. Each signal needs a separate review.
Explore alerts in the example registry.
Compare the record with the medicine label.
Illustrative view. Links open sections of this website; the figures do not describe a live operation.
Illustrative photograph of a 120 ml amber oral-solution bottle.
Explore how a unit is connected to its record.
Reduced motion: use Previous and Next at your own pace.
Illustration · proposal
01 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The whole journey follows the same product and its record.
Illustration. It does not depict a real Traza installation or product.
02 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The participant joins and describes the product.
Registering information does not by itself prove that the object matches it.
03 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The identifier is linked to the unit record.
The signature attests issuer and data integrity. It does not prevent physical copies.
04 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The mark is applied to the object; activation is still pending.
These states are a narrative proposal; they do not extend the verification engine.
05 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
After production, the owner completes lot and expiry before activation.
Illustrated transition. No activation date or real authorisation is invented.
06 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
Each medicine package keeps its own QR; the lot provides shared context.
This link does not record transport, distribution or sales.
07 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The issuer confirms which codes were used when the run ends.
Printing a code alone does not show that the unit is activated.
08 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The record is incomplete. Let us review the reason and the expected coverage.
An event not received is a state, not a cause. A gap does not prove fraud.
09 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
The lookup separates the evidence; it does not give an authenticity score.
The lookup does not certify physical authenticity.
10 / 10
This step’s data belongs to the sample record. The photograph illustrates the medicine; it does not represent a scan or a physical check.
A signal helps prioritise review. It does not make an accusation by itself.
Example: the outcome may confirm or correct the state. It does not modify the record.
Illustration · proposal
Related record: TRZ-7F2K-4K7Q-92FA. The story does not modify this record.
The whole journey follows the same product and its record.
Who contributes or decides: Programme participant.
What changes: The unit to be identified is defined.
Illustration. It does not depict a real Traza installation or product.
The participant joins and describes the product.
Who contributes or decides: Participant and programme owner.
What changes: An accountable party, the description and the identification rules are linked.
Participant: Defined responsibilities and permissions.
Product: Description and declared data.
Registering information does not by itself prove that the object matches it.
The identifier is linked to the unit record.
Who contributes or decides: Issuer authorised by the programme.
What changes: Narrative state: issued. This does not yet imply application or activation.
Identity: Issued · not yet applied.
The signature attests issuer and data integrity. It does not prevent physical copies.
The mark is applied to the object; activation is still pending.
Who contributes or decides: Person responsible for application on the line.
What changes: Application is recorded separately from authorisation to activate.
Application: Mark applied to the object.
Activation: Pending · not yet active.
These states are a narrative proposal; they do not extend the verification engine.
After production, the owner completes lot and expiry before activation.
Who contributes or decides: Authorised role under the programme rules.
What changes: The state changes from pending to active and the change is documented.
Narrative state: Active · change documented.
Illustrated transition. No activation date or real authorisation is invented.
Each medicine package keeps its own QR; the lot provides shared context.
Who contributes or decides: Responsible manufacturer or importer.
What changes: The record links each unit to product, lot and expiry.
Product: Oral solution · 120 ml; declared concentration and health registration.
Lot: Shared production and expiry context.
Unit: Its own QR on the carton or bottle.
This link does not record transport, distribution or sales.
The issuer confirms which codes were used when the run ends.
Who contributes or decides: Production owner.
What changes: Used codes become active; unused codes are voided when the issuance closes.
Used code: Activated after completing the record.
Unused code: Voided when the issuance closes.
Printing a code alone does not show that the unit is activated.
The record is incomplete. Let us review the reason and the expected coverage.
Who contributes or decides: Participants providing events and the review team.
What changes: Received events are compared with what was expected to be recorded.
State: Event not received.
Review: Pending synchronisation, a documented exception or another reason to establish.
An event not received is a state, not a cause. A gap does not prove fraud.
Issuance, printing and record closure are reviewed. Missing activation requires checking the run; the registry cannot establish logistics movements.
The lookup separates the evidence; it does not give an authenticity score.
Who contributes or decides: Person looking up and comparing the product.
What changes: Available information is shown without conflating the checks.
Signature: Issuer and integrity of the signed data. It does not prevent physical copies.
Registry: Identifier found and declared status. Does not demonstrate location.
Data: Information to compare. The person checks whether it matches the product.
Signals: Patterns in the available records. No alerts does not mean no risks.
The lookup does not certify physical authenticity.
A signal helps prioritise review. It does not make an accusation by itself.
Who contributes or decides: Review or inspection role, according to the programme.
What changes: The review and its documented outcome are added to the record.
Signal: An observation that merits review.
Outcome: Documented human decision; not an automatic verdict.
Example: the outcome may confirm or correct the state. It does not modify the record.
From the need to the pilot, evaluation and continuity.
Reduced motion: use Previous and Next at your own pace.
Proposed route · subject to the applicable regime
01 / 08
Existing controls and visibility gaps are reviewed.
Proposed route, not a universal legal formula or a deployment commitment.
02 / 08
What gets identified, who records, what is public and what is protected.
Ownership is not automatically assigned to the state or to Traza.
03 / 08
Consult, document and respond to the comments received.
Consultation may adjust or confirm decisions; it does not require changing everything.
04 / 08
The pilot requires prior authorisation or contracting.
The public route depends on the applicable regime; a private agreement does not replace that authority.
05 / 08
The pilot tests application, reading, capture and integration.
Attributing an improvement is difficult. Comparison alone does not establish causality.
06 / 08
The supplier does not write the independent audit findings.
An audit may approve without findings. The correction shown is only an example.
07 / 08
Expansion rests on measurable acceptance, cost and capacity.
Traza is a private company. This story does not establish a contract award or endorsement.
08 / 08
Ownership, custody, permissions and portability: agreed per programme.
Proposed continuity, not an established deployed capability. It requires agreements and tests.
Proposed route · subject to the applicable regime
Existing controls and visibility gaps are reviewed.
Who contributes or decides: Buyer and programme participants.
What changes: Scope, use cases and what to measure are agreed.
Manufacturer and importer route: Voluntary agreement between the parties.
Public programme: Authority and procurement decisions under its jurisdiction.
Proposed route, not a universal legal formula or a deployment commitment.
What gets identified, who records, what is public and what is protected.
Who contributes or decides: Programme owners and participants.
What changes: Data, permissions, responsibilities and costs to agree are documented.
Data and access: Ownership, custody and permissions defined per programme.
Operations: Equipment, consumables, integration and support: responsibilities to agree.
Ownership is not automatically assigned to the state or to Traza.
Consult, document and respond to the comments received.
Who contributes or decides: Manufacturers, importers, healthcare teams and programme owner.
What changes: Comments receive a response and remain traceable.
Consultation may adjust or confirm decisions; it does not require changing everything.
The pilot requires prior authorisation or contracting.
Who contributes or decides: Buyer, pilot owners and evaluation team.
What changes: The method is agreed and the starting position is measured before the pilot.
Prerequisite: Pilot authorisation or contracting.
Baseline: Prior measurement with an agreed method and comparison.
The public route depends on the applicable regime; a private agreement does not replace that authority.
The pilot tests application, reading, capture and integration.
Who contributes or decides: Pilot participants and proposed technical supplier.
What changes: Measure again and compare with the baseline.
Attributing an improvement is difficult. Comparison alone does not establish causality.
The comparison may use a control or a phased rollout, according to the agreed method. No unsubstantiated Traza percentages, deadlines or results are shown.
The supplier does not write the independent audit findings.
Who contributes or decides: Independent evaluator and programme owner.
What changes: Evidence is assessed against the acceptance criteria.
Possible outcome: Meets the agreed criteria.
Example with a finding: Correct an incomplete capture and check it again.
An audit may approve without findings. The correction shown is only an example.
Expansion rests on measurable acceptance, cost and capacity.
Who contributes or decides: Buyer and competent authority or parties.
What changes: The decision is to proceed, adjust or not expand; onboarding may be phased.
Traza’s technical role · proposal: Issuance, events, lookup, integration and portability; scope to agree.
Traza is a private company. This story does not establish a contract award or endorsement.
Ownership, custody, permissions and portability: agreed per programme.
Who contributes or decides: Programme owner, participants and suppliers.
What changes: Export and supplier transition are tested without losing records or permissions.
Onboarding: Phases, training and support to agree.
Exit and continuity: Open formats, complete export and supplier replacement.
Proposed continuity, not an established deployed capability. It requires agreements and tests.
The platform, in action
Try what a person can query, how a unit’s lifecycle is recorded and what information a control team reviews.
Compare the product with its record and understand each result, including its limits.
Try a queryFollow a unit’s events: who reports them, when they happen and what information they contain.
Explore the journeyExplore reports, signals and field inspections with role-based permissions.
Open the control viewEach perspective works on the same record: what changes is what each role can see and do.
A proposal for medicines
Manufacturers, importers, pharmacies and healthcare teams need to look up the same unit with different permissions. Traza proposes connecting their records, with responsibilities and scope agreed in each pilot.
Medicines are the use case featured on this website. Integrations, permissions and operations are agreed and validated for each program.
Meet Traza
Traza is a private company proposing digital identity for medicines. This site describes the platform; it does not establish contracts or endorsements from health authorities.
Write to us and we will reply within business days.
