The programmatic landscape has long felt like a high-speed game of telephone played in a dark room, where advertisers know the start and end of a transaction but remain blind to the many hands touching the message in between. Anastasia Braitsik, a seasoned authority in SEO, content marketing, and deep data analytics, joins us to shed light on a pivotal shift in how we track these digital journeys. As the IAB Tech Lab introduces its proposed update to the OpenRTB SupplyChain Object, we are moving toward an era where the technical custody of a bid request is just as visible as the financial one. This conversation explores the nuances of the new v1.1 standard, the move beyond simple payment trails, and how the industry will grapple with a sudden influx of transparency that reveals the true complexity of the open internet.
Current standards often track payment flows while missing intermediaries like SDKs or wrappers that handle bid requests. How will this proposed update change the way advertisers perceive the value of their supply chain?
For the longest time, advertisers have been operating with a partial map of the programmatic world, focusing exclusively on the money trail while the actual mechanics remained obscured. When we look at the proposed SupplyChain v1.1, we are finally moving toward a reality where every single entity that processes, routes, or enriches a bid request is brought into the light. This change means that a buyer won’t just see who they paid; they will see the SDKs, the server-side ad insertion platforms, and the various wrappers that the impression passed through before reaching its destination. It is a massive shift in perception because it turns technical participation into a measurable metric rather than a hidden variable. Advertisers will likely feel a sense of relief mixed with scrutiny as they realize just how many technical layers have been “touching” their bids without being part of the financial ledger. This level of transparency allows brands to stop guessing about the efficiency of their paths and start making data-driven decisions about which technical partners actually earn their keep.
Why is the distinction between a financial participant and a technical participant so critical for modern transparency in programmatic buying?
The distinction is critical because, in our current infrastructure, a company can have a profound impact on the success of an ad placement without ever appearing on a billing statement. Today’s schain standard is excellent for following the dollar, but it creates a blind spot where critical infrastructure like Prebid implementations or complex ad servers can manipulate or delay a request in ways the buyer never sees. By identifying every company that handles a bid request, we are essentially giving every participant a digital fingerprint that buyers can track. This matters immensely as the ecosystem grows more complex and fragmented; if an SDK is slowing down the process or a wrapper is redundant, that technical “touch” matters just as much as a fee. Without this visibility, we are only seeing half the story, and in a world where performance is measured in milliseconds, knowing who has technical custody is the only way to truly optimize for speed and quality.
There is a prevailing assumption in the industry that fewer intermediaries lead to greater efficiency. How does SupplyChain v1.1 challenge this “less is more” philosophy?
The beauty of the SupplyChain v1.1 proposal is that it fundamentally shifts the conversation from the quantity of intermediaries to the quality of their contribution. We’ve spent years pushing for shorter supply paths under the assumption that “less is more,” but this update suggests that a longer chain might actually be superior if every participant adds a layer of measurable value. If a buyer can see that a specific intermediary is enriching a bid with better data or providing a more secure routing path, they might prefer that “longer” chain over a shorter, more opaque one. It forces a move away from the simplistic counting of hops and toward an evaluation of what each participant contributes to the final outcome. This transparency will likely create a more nuanced marketplace where vendors aren’t penalized just for existing, but are instead rewarded for the specific utility they bring to the transaction journey.
With the introduction of the hp=0 designation for technical custody, what kind of friction or challenges do you expect to see during the implementation and rollout phase?
The rollout will undoubtedly be a period of significant friction as vendors who have operated in the shadows are suddenly forced to account for their presence. By using the hp=0 designation for companies that take technical custody but don’t participate in the payment flow, the IAB Tech Lab is creating a very clear label for “technical-only” participants. We can expect some pushback from intermediaries who might struggle to justify their role once their redundancy is exposed to the buyers. Furthermore, the organization is anticipating longer schains as this transparency takes hold, which means SSPs and DSPs will need to be incredibly diligent during the public comment period ending August 21, 2026. There will be a technical burden as companies conduct staged testing, validate parsing behavior, and monitor bid health to ensure that this influx of new data doesn’t accidentally break existing systems. It is an ambitious undertaking that requires the entire industry to scale traffic gradually and carefully to avoid unintended disruptions.
As we move toward a more transparent ecosystem, how should brands and agencies adjust their strategies to handle the “winners and losers” this visibility will create?
Brands need to move quickly to audit their current supply paths and prepare for a world where they can see the full extent of their technical dependencies. The upcoming scrutiny will inevitably expose redundant infrastructure and duplicate bid requests, which will lead to a culling of vendors who add little to no value. Agencies should start by leaning into the rollout guidance provided by the IAB Tech Lab, focusing on validating the behavior of their partners as these more detailed schains become available. This is a golden opportunity for companies that deliver measurable value to distinguish themselves and for brands to reclaim wasted spend that was previously lost in the fog of hidden technical layers. The strategy should no longer be about finding the cheapest path, but the most transparent one where every hp=0 or financial participant can be linked to a specific performance benefit.
What is your forecast for the future of supply-path optimization once these technical technicalities become standard practice?
My forecast is that we are heading toward a highly meritocratic programmatic environment where the “black box” finally becomes a glass house. By the time we pass the August 21, 2026, deadline for public comment and move into full adoption, I expect to see a significant consolidation of the middle-market vendors who cannot prove their worth in a transparent chain. We will likely see a shift where “technical value” becomes a primary KPI for SPO, alongside price and reach. Buyers will become much more sophisticated, using this new data to build custom “allow-lists” of technical participants they trust, effectively bypassing any entity that doesn’t provide a clear advantage. Ultimately, this will lead to a leaner, faster, and more honest internet where the value of an impression is determined not just by who bought it, but by the integrity of the entire journey it took to get there.
