Raptive proposes encrypted transaction IDs to balance programmatic transparency

Raptive announced on September 18, 2025, a comprehensive proposal to address the ongoing Transaction ID controversy that has fractured the programmatic advertising ecosystem. Chief Strategy Officer Paul Bannister outlined a three-component solution designed to create "a symbiotic scenario where both the buy and sell sides participate in a give-and-take that benefits all."

The proposal arrives amid significant industry tensions following Prebid's decision to disable cross-exchange transaction ID functionality on August 27, 2025. That change eliminated advertisers' ability to identify duplicate bid requests for identical advertising opportunities across different supply-side platforms. The IAB Technology Laboratory subsequently declared the implementation "materially violates the OpenRTB specification."

Technical architecture addresses dual concerns

Raptive's proposal centers on three interconnected elements. The IAB Tech Lab would add a new "etid" (encrypted TID) field to OpenRTB with guidance on encryption types and approaches. Prebid and other publisher technologies would implement this functionality while publishers provide decryption keys exclusively to partner demand-side platforms.

Critically, DSPs would only receive these decryption keys after meeting specific requirements. They must implement data feeds enabling TID-level bid price reconciliation, sending back to publishers their bid amounts for all TIDs. Additionally, DSPs must multi-bid into publisher inventory through their preferred connections.

According to Bannister, "Encrypted TIDs remove much of the data leakage and privacy concerns that publishers have around TIDs. Since keys are required to use them, this creates a symbiotic scenario where both the buy and sell sides participate in a give-and-take that benefits all."

The encryption approach addresses publisher concerns about confidential information joining across bidstream participants. Publishers had expressed worries that unified transaction IDs could enable buyers to combine bid requests across different sellers, potentially exposing relationships they preferred to keep separate.

Multi-bidding replaces lost density

The proposal specifically addresses bid density concerns through mandatory multi-bidding requirements. Publishers have deployed bid throttling strategies to manage overwhelming duplicate requests created by header bidding adoption. Raptive's approach aims to replace naturally occurring bid density with structured multi-bid submissions.

"Multi-bidding will replace some of the bid density that will be lost from transaction IDs being available," Bannister explained. "It's critical that multi-bidding is fair and gives the publisher a reasonable view of the bid landscape."

The proposal suggests each seat on a DSP could emit one bid, with all submissions shared with publishers. Industry discussions during the transaction ID standards clash have highlighted how bid duplication wastes up to $20 billion annually across the programmatic ecosystem.

Transparency feeds enable publisher optimization

The bid transparency component requires DSPs to provide publishers with net bid price data for all TIDs they bid on. This information flow enables publishers to perform their own path optimization, accessing the same supply chain visibility that DSPs traditionally enjoyed.

"TIDs will give DSPs full transparency into the different fees that numerous intermediaries charge before the bid reaches the publisher," Bannister noted. "Data feedback to publishers gives them that same information, which they can use for their own path optimization."

This transparency mechanism addresses asymmetric information advantages that have characterized programmatic advertising relationships. Publishers would gain insights into demand-side valuation patterns while maintaining control over their inventory monetization strategies.

Implementation timeline and industry response

Raptive announced it will enable TIDs on its inventory to provide data on short-term benefits and offer buyers insights from "one of the largest sellers of web inventory." The company's implementation will serve as a testing ground for the proposal's practical applications.

Industry discussions on LinkedIn and X generated mixed responses. Nepomuk Seiler from highfivve questioned encryption key distribution, asking whether "the etid would have different encryption keys for each bidder." Bannister confirmed different keys per path, suggesting encryption of combined TID and pathname data.

Doug Lauretano from an unspecified company advocated for net price data on all bids rather than just wins, arguing this would provide "better understanding of the bid landscape from the DSP level instead of just from the exchange level."

Market context and regulatory implications

The proposal emerges as programmatic advertising continues robust growth. According to Comscore's State of Programmatic Report, 72% of marketers plan to increase programmatic investment in 2025, marking substantial growth from 62% in 2024.

However, transparency concerns persist despite expansion. Brian O'Kelley from Scope3 predicted the transaction ID controversy could accelerate market consolidation and direct relationships, with "DSPs going direct to supply because they can't trust the programmatic supply chain to give them transparent information."

Recent regulatory developments add urgency to standardization efforts. The European Union's Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising regulation forced Meta and Google to withdraw from EU political advertising, highlighting tensions between regulatory requirements and platform operational capabilities.

Technical implementation challenges

The proposal faces significant coordination challenges across the programmatic ecosystem. Publishers using Prebid Server integration would need server-side implementation due to limited locations for source.tid and ext.tid in Prebid Server requests.

Additionally, the encryption approach must balance security with operational efficiency. Each encryption path would require unique keys, creating substantial key management overhead for large publishers working with multiple demand partners.

The proposal's success depends on broad industry adoption rather than unilateral implementation. Unlike Prebid's August 27 changes, which proceeded without extensive consultation, Raptive's approach explicitly seeks to "spur debate and try to reach a good conclusion for all."

Commercial implications for publishers

For publishers, the proposal addresses yield compression concerns while maintaining transparency benefits. The combination of controlled access through encryption keys and enhanced bid transparency data could strengthen publisher negotiating positions with demand partners.

Premium publishers particularly benefit from the selective key distribution mechanism. High-value inventory owners can choose which DSPs receive access to their transaction ID data based on data sharing reciprocity and multi-bidding commitments.

The recent emphasis on deal quality across programmatic platforms aligns with Raptive's transparency focus. The Trade Desk's Deal Desk platform, announced June 9, 2025, highlighted how 90% of deal IDs fail to scale effectively due to limited visibility into performance metrics.

DSP operational adaptations required

Demand-side platforms would need substantial infrastructure modifications to support the proposal. Implementing TID-level bid price reconciliation requires new data processing capabilities and storage systems for comprehensive bid history tracking.

Multi-bidding requirements could strain existing DSP architectures designed for single-bid submissions per auction opportunity. The operational overhead of managing multiple encrypted key relationships with individual publishers represents another implementation challenge.

However, participating DSPs would gain enhanced supply chain visibility and reduced duplicate bidding inefficiencies. The transparency feeds could improve campaign optimization algorithms by providing clearer insights into publisher inventory valuation patterns.

Industry standardization pathway

Raptive's proposal requires coordination between multiple industry bodies. The IAB Tech Lab would need to modify OpenRTB specifications while Prebid.org would implement the technical changes across its header bidding wrapper.

This coordination challenge reflects broader programmatic advertising governance questions highlighted by recent standards clashes. The IAB Tech Lab's August 27 statement challenging Prebid's unilateral specification changes demonstrated tensions between standards bodies and implementation organizations.

Successful adoption would likely require extensive industry consultation and pilot testing across major publishers and DSPs. The proposal's complexity demands careful technical validation before broad deployment across the programmatic ecosystem.

Privacy and regulatory considerations

The encryption approach addresses privacy concerns raised during recent transaction ID controversies. By requiring specific key access rather than universal transparency, the proposal creates controlled data sharing mechanisms.

However, regulatory scrutiny of programmatic advertising continues intensifying. The Department of Justice's ongoing antitrust suit against Google over digital advertising conduct could influence how transaction ID solutions develop across the ecosystem.

European privacy regulations, including GDPR implementation and the upcoming Digital Services Act provisions, may require additional safeguards around encrypted identifier sharing. The proposal's success depends partly on demonstrating compliance with evolving privacy requirements.

Market response and adoption prospects

Early industry responses suggest cautious interest in Raptive's balanced approach. The proposal addresses legitimate concerns from both publishers and advertisers while maintaining operational feasibility for implementation organizations.

Recent programmatic innovations demonstrate market appetite for transparency solutions. Comscore's Certified Deal IDs integration with Magnite, announced May 5, 2025, showed how measurement companies are developing new approaches to inventory quality verification.

The proposal's emphasis on mutual benefit rather than zero-sum outcomes distinguishes it from previous transaction ID discussions. By requiring data sharing reciprocity and multi-bidding commitments, the framework creates incentives for constructive participation rather than unilateral optimization.

Raptive's implementation on its own inventory will provide crucial real-world data on the proposal's effectiveness. As one of the largest web inventory sellers, the company's testing results could significantly influence broader industry adoption decisions.

The programmatic advertising ecosystem's response to this proposal may determine whether the recent transaction ID fragmentation represents a temporary disruption or a permanent shift toward less transparent auction mechanisms. Given the industry's $700 billion annual value and ongoing regulatory scrutiny, the stakes for finding collaborative solutions remain substantial.

Timeline

• June 2022: IAB approves Community Extension for per-impression transaction IDs in OpenRTB
• June 2022: Prebid implements initial transaction ID support following OpenRTB specifications
• January 21, 2025: Comscore State of Programmatic Report shows 72% of marketers plan increased investment
• May 5, 2025: Comscore launches Certified Deal IDs with Magnite for inventory quality verification
• June 9, 2025: The Trade Desk launches Deal Desk to manage advertising deals
• July 16, 2025: Publishers deploy bid throttling to tackle programmatic waste
• August 27, 2025: Prebid disables cross-exchange transaction ID functionality
• August 27, 2025: IAB Tech Lab challenges Prebid transaction ID changes as specification violation
• August 29, 2025: Brian O'Kelley posts analysis predicting DSP direct supply relationships
• September 18, 2025: Raptive announces encrypted TID proposal with three-component solution

Summary

Who: Raptive Chief Strategy Officer Paul Bannister proposed the encrypted transaction ID solution, targeting publishers, demand-side platforms, and the broader programmatic advertising ecosystem including the IAB Tech Lab and Prebid.org.

What: A comprehensive three-component proposal combining encrypted transaction IDs (eTIDs), mandatory bid transparency feeds, and multi-bidding requirements designed to balance publisher privacy concerns with advertiser transparency needs in programmatic advertising auctions.

When: The proposal was announced on September 18, 2025, following industry tensions that emerged after Prebid disabled cross-exchange transaction ID functionality on August 27, 2025.

Where: The global programmatic advertising ecosystem, with initial implementation planned on Raptive's inventory as a testing ground for broader industry adoption across publishers, DSPs, and ad tech platforms worldwide.

Why: To address the transaction ID controversy that has fractured programmatic advertising, providing a collaborative solution that maintains supply chain transparency for advertisers while protecting publisher privacy and commercial interests through controlled, encrypted data sharing mechanisms.