• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to after header navigation
  • Skip to site footer
MyZA

MyZA

News, Directory, Events and Other Stuff

  • Social Media
  • Sport
  • World News
  • Home
  • Submit News
  • Directory
  • Events
  • Stratlec
  • TFSA
  • News
    • APO
    • Today’s Sport News
    • Todays Social Media and Tech Headlines
    • Today’s World News
    • Today’s SA Financial News
  • Contact
You are here: Home / News / The Supply Blockchain of Trust

The Supply Blockchain of Trust

17 August 2026 by Guest
RS South Africa

By Viv Muthan Pr Eng, Head of Export Sales and Operations.

Trust has been the invisible infrastructure of supply chains for decades. Maintenance engineers trusted procurement teams to source from credible suppliers, while procurement professionals trusted manufacturers to uphold the engineering integrity of the products they supplied. In the last two decades, this reality has dramatically shifted with counterfeiters becoming more sophisticated, technology becoming more accessible, and imitation products becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish from the genuine article. The result is that trust has fragmented and the onus of verification is falling back onto the shoulders of the product users. The problem is that even the most experienced engineer will struggle to verify a genuine product under these conditions because they are no longer competing against opportunistic non-expert counterfeiters making products that are ostensibly cheap and nasty. They are competing with networked operations with access to advanced manufacturing technologies, digital design tools and increasingly sophisticated methods of replication.

Many years ago, the humble bearing became one of the first industrial products to be widely counterfeited. Initially, identifying a fake was relatively straightforward. Products carried obvious tell-tale signs: dye marks instead of genuine heat-treatment discolouration, spelling mistakes in product markings, poor packaging quality, unreliable documentation and no verifiable connection to an authorised source of supply. Bearing original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) responded quickly. They launched awareness campaigns, strengthened distributor accreditation programmes and introduced anti-counterfeiting measures such as holographic labels, serialisation and QR-code verification systems. Packaging quality improved and traceability became more robust.

Within a few years, counterfeiters adapted. They started attending trade shows, copied packaging standards and used crude optical character recognition (OCR) technology to improve the visual appearance of their products. They invested in moving from copying to manufacturing replicas at scale, learning through the process, refining and getting better with each run. It became almost impossible even for a trained application engineer to spot the differences without a lab test and an electron microscope inspection of the raceways to verify surface finishes. In fact, copies became so good that one OEM actually bought production capacity at the counterfeiting facility and after implementing some standards, started mass production of some of its high-volume SKUs at that plant. This was all before the mass market availability of machine vision and deep learning tools.

So how might modern engineers respond to the very clear and present danger of counterfeit products that potentially jeopardise the lives and livelihoods of millions of people around the world? One useful way to think about the challenge is through the concept of a blockchain. A blockchain is commonly described as a shared, tamper-resistant record of events that allows participants to trust the history of an asset without having to blindly trust one another. It can be thought of as a digital chain of custody, recording the purchase transaction, handoffs, inspections, certificates or movements resulting in a single source of truth that all participants can verify. The value of a blockchain is not the technology but in its ability to preserve history. Once events are reliably recorded, they become difficult to alter without leaving evidence behind.

It can be argued that supply chains require precisely the same capability. Authenticity depends on provenance. Provenance depends on history. And history is only valuable when it can be trusted. A supply blockchain is not necessarily a technology platform but rather the accumulation of verified events across a product's journey, from manufacture to point of installation or use. Every authorised transaction, inspection, storage movement, quality check and customer delivery contributes another link in the chain of trust.

Trusted suppliers have always maintained such records. Historically, trust was established through reputation. Customers bought from suppliers they knew and relied on brands that had proven themselves over decades. Today, reputation remains essential, but reputation alone is no longer enough. Customers increasingly require evidence. The most trusted suppliers will therefore be those that combine reputation with verification. They will be able to demonstrate where products originated, how they moved through the supply chain and whether they remained within authorised channels throughout their journey.

In this sense, every verified event strengthens the supply blockchain and every authenticated transaction reinforces customer confidence. As it always has been, trust is built one memory at a time. The difference today is that digital technologies can make those memories visible, auditable and resistant to manipulation.

For engineers tasked with keeping people safe, equipment operational and production running, that may be the most valuable innovation of all. Not because it eliminates risk, but because it makes trust verifiable. And perhaps that will help them sleep a little better at night, when they are not on standby or working shift.


References:

Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2018). Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. International Journal of Web and Grid Services, 14(4), 352-375.

Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J. and Shen, L., 2019. Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. International journal of production research, 57(7), pp.2117-2135.

Staake, T., Thiesse, F. and Fleisch, E., 2009. The emergence of counterfeit trade: a literature review. European Journal of Marketing, 43(3-4), pp.320-349.

RS South Africa (https://Africa.RSDelivers.com) is a trading brand of RS Group plc (LSE: RS1) and a leading provider of industrial product and service solutions.

Distributed by APO Group on behalf of RS South Africa.

Further information is available via these links:
RS South Africa (https://apo-opa.co/3SEWVK2)
RS Africa Exports (https://Africa.RSDelivers.com)
DesignSpark (https://apo-opa.co/4ghSQn5)
RS Group plc (www.RSGroup.com) 

PR Contact Person – RS South Africa:
Princess Tlou
Communications & Content Specialist
RS South Africa
Princess.Tlou@rsgroup.com
+27 11 691 9366

Media Contact Person – NGAGE:
Thobile Ndlovu
PR Account Executive
thobile@ngage.co.za
+27 11 867 7763

Follow RS South Africa:
Twitter: https://apo-opa.co/4wq3PAF
LinkedIn: https://apo-opa.co/4hz5KPP
Facebook: https://apo-opa.co/3UBf1gy

About RS:
RS is a high-service global product and service solutions provider for industrial customers, enabling them to operate efficiently and sustainably.

We operate in 33 markets, stock over 875,000 industrial and specialist products and list an additional five million relevant for our industrial customers, sourced from over 2,500 suppliers. This extensive range supports our customers across the industrial lifecycle of designing, building and maintaining equipment and operations. We enhance their experience through a tailored service model, leveraging our efficient physical, digital and process infrastructure sustainably. We combine a technically led and digitally enabled approach with an exceptional team of experts; ultimately, it’s our people that make the difference.

Our purpose, making amazing happen for a better world, reflects our focus on delivering results for people, planet and profit.

RS Group plc is listed on the London Stock Exchange with stock ticker RS1 and in the year ended 31 March 2026 reported revenue of £2,881 million.

Media files
RS South Africa
Download logo

By Viv Muthan Pr Eng, Head of Export Sales and Operations.

Trust has been the invisible infrastructure of supply chains for decades. Maintenance engineers trusted procurement teams to source from credible suppliers, while procurement professionals trusted manufacturers to uphold the engineering integrity of the products they supplied. In the last two decades, this reality has dramatically shifted with counterfeiters becoming more sophisticated, technology becoming more accessible, and imitation products becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish from the genuine article. The result is that trust has fragmented and the onus of verification is falling back onto the shoulders of the product users. The problem is that even the most experienced engineer will struggle to verify a genuine product under these conditions because they are no longer competing against opportunistic non-expert counterfeiters making products that are ostensibly cheap and nasty. They are competing with networked operations with access to advanced manufacturing technologies, digital design tools and increasingly sophisticated methods of replication.

Many years ago, the humble bearing became one of the first industrial products to be widely counterfeited. Initially, identifying a fake was relatively straightforward. Products carried obvious tell-tale signs: dye marks instead of genuine heat-treatment discolouration, spelling mistakes in product markings, poor packaging quality, unreliable documentation and no verifiable connection to an authorised source of supply. Bearing original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) responded quickly. They launched awareness campaigns, strengthened distributor accreditation programmes and introduced anti-counterfeiting measures such as holographic labels, serialisation and QR-code verification systems. Packaging quality improved and traceability became more robust.

Within a few years, counterfeiters adapted. They started attending trade shows, copied packaging standards and used crude optical character recognition (OCR) technology to improve the visual appearance of their products. They invested in moving from copying to manufacturing replicas at scale, learning through the process, refining and getting better with each run. It became almost impossible even for a trained application engineer to spot the differences without a lab test and an electron microscope inspection of the raceways to verify surface finishes. In fact, copies became so good that one OEM actually bought production capacity at the counterfeiting facility and after implementing some standards, started mass production of some of its high-volume SKUs at that plant. This was all before the mass market availability of machine vision and deep learning tools.

So how might modern engineers respond to the very clear and present danger of counterfeit products that potentially jeopardise the lives and livelihoods of millions of people around the world? One useful way to think about the challenge is through the concept of a blockchain. A blockchain is commonly described as a shared, tamper-resistant record of events that allows participants to trust the history of an asset without having to blindly trust one another. It can be thought of as a digital chain of custody, recording the purchase transaction, handoffs, inspections, certificates or movements resulting in a single source of truth that all participants can verify. The value of a blockchain is not the technology but in its ability to preserve history. Once events are reliably recorded, they become difficult to alter without leaving evidence behind.

It can be argued that supply chains require precisely the same capability. Authenticity depends on provenance. Provenance depends on history. And history is only valuable when it can be trusted. A supply blockchain is not necessarily a technology platform but rather the accumulation of verified events across a product’s journey, from manufacture to point of installation or use. Every authorised transaction, inspection, storage movement, quality check and customer delivery contributes another link in the chain of trust.

Trusted suppliers have always maintained such records. Historically, trust was established through reputation. Customers bought from suppliers they knew and relied on brands that had proven themselves over decades. Today, reputation remains essential, but reputation alone is no longer enough. Customers increasingly require evidence. The most trusted suppliers will therefore be those that combine reputation with verification. They will be able to demonstrate where products originated, how they moved through the supply chain and whether they remained within authorised channels throughout their journey.

In this sense, every verified event strengthens the supply blockchain and every authenticated transaction reinforces customer confidence. As it always has been, trust is built one memory at a time. The difference today is that digital technologies can make those memories visible, auditable and resistant to manipulation.

For engineers tasked with keeping people safe, equipment operational and production running, that may be the most valuable innovation of all. Not because it eliminates risk, but because it makes trust verifiable. And perhaps that will help them sleep a little better at night, when they are not on standby or working shift.


References:

Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H., Chen, X., & Wang, H. (2018). Blockchain challenges and opportunities: A survey. International Journal of Web and Grid Services, 14(4), 352-375.

Saberi, S., Kouhizadeh, M., Sarkis, J. and Shen, L., 2019. Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. International journal of production research, 57(7), pp.2117-2135.

Staake, T., Thiesse, F. and Fleisch, E., 2009. The emergence of counterfeit trade: a literature review. European Journal of Marketing, 43(3-4), pp.320-349.

RS South Africa (https://Africa.RSDelivers.com) is a trading brand of RS Group plc (LSE: RS1) and a leading provider of industrial product and service solutions.

 

Per Kind Favour of APO

Africa Fact: In the Malian city of Gao stands the Mausoleum of Askia the Great, a weird sixteenth century edifice that resembles a step pyramid.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
Category: NewsTag: APO

If you feel strongly about this article then feel free to send MyZA a ‘Letter to the Editor’ using the submission form below:


Letter to the Editor

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
If this is in response to an article please include that article title here or as the lead in for the first paragraph of your Letter below.

Separate tags with commas

Localise your letter by naming the city your words are about. Add relevant words describing your subject. Single comma separated words of no more than 5
Your Name(Required)
Your Name will be linked to the website below.
Your personal, business or social media web site
Choose NO to not set up a user account on MyZA. User Accounts will allow you to submit letters under your own Author Name

3 Latest Letters to the Editor:

  • Fun South African fact

    Dear Editor Fun South African fact: towns like Franschhoek and Stellenbosch are home to world-class wine farms set in stunning, scenic surroundings. Regards Aressa Smith In Response to/From: Luxury Properties Seized in New Lottery Crackdown

    27 January 2026
  • Condolences on the Passing of Lusanda Dumke

    Statement by Leander Kruger MPL – DA Buffalo City Constituency Leader: The Democratic Alliance in Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality mourns the passing of Springbok Women’s rugby player and Mdantsane trailblazer, Lusanda Dumke, who lost her battle with cancer at the age of 28. South Africa has lost an exceptional athlete, a leader, and a source…

    17 December 2025
  • Rape Kits Delivered, But…

    Statement by Nicholas Gotsell MP – DA NCOP Member on Security & Justice: The DA can confirm that 2 840 rape kits arrived in Cape Town on Monday, following sustained DA oversight and pressure after multiple police stations across the Western Cape were found to be without this critical forensic evidence tool. While this delivery…

    17 December 2025

About Guest

Previous Post:SADC Media Reception | SA News
Next Post:Refurbished Ultrasound (Sonar) Machines South Africa | Sonarshop by Surgi-Clin | SA News

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Demo Tequila

    17 August 2026 at 10:56 am

    Fun South African Fact: Table Mountain in Cape Town is believed to be one of the oldest mountains in the world and one of the planet’s 12 main energy centres, radiating magnetic, electric or spiritual energy.

Copyright © 2026 · MyZA · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Reach Trust