7Block Labs
Contact Us
Blockchain Services

ByAUJay

description: Hyperledger isn’t one product; it’s a toolbox. This guide shows when Hyperledger Fabric, Besu, FireFly, Cacti, Bevel, and Indy/AnonCreds are the right fit—what they do best in 2025, how they’re evolving, and how to turn them into production value with clear next steps.

Hyperledger Blockchain Development Services: When Are They the Right Fit?

Decision‑makers often ask us for a “quick take” on Hyperledger. The truth: Hyperledger is not one platform or even one bet. It’s a mature, modular family of open‑source projects you can combine—Fabric for permissioned data sharing, Besu for EVM networks, FireFly for app‑level orchestration, Bevel for DevOps, Cacti for cross‑chain, and Indy/AnonCreds for privacy‑preserving identity. Used in the right combinations, these can compress time‑to‑value from months to weeks while preserving enterprise guardrails. Below is our field guide from 7Block Labs on when each is the right fit in late‑2025, with specific features, emerging practices, and implementation details you can action.

TL;DR: When Hyperledger makes sense

Choose Hyperledger if you need:

  • Multi‑party collaboration with fine‑grained privacy and governance (Fabric PDCs; per‑organization data; channel‑level controls). (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • EVM compatibility without public‑chain risk, or the option to bridge to public Ethereum later (Besu with QBFT/IBFT2, permissioning, privacy). (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • A faster path to business features (tokens, off‑chain data, eventing) via a “supernode” middleware rather than building plumbing from scratch (FireFly). (github.com)
  • Cross‑ledger workflows (e.g., Fabric↔Besu asset swaps and data sharing) without a third‑party settlement chain (Cacti). (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)
  • K8s‑first DevOps/IaC for day‑2 operations across vendors and clouds (Bevel). (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)
  • Verifiable digital identity that protects user privacy (Indy/AnonCreds, with active v2 work incl. BBS signatures). (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)

If your primary goal is open DeFi composability, fully permissionless participation, or speculation‑driven liquidity, start on public chains and EVM L2s. You can still anchor or interoperate later using Besu and Cacti.

What’s new and why it matters (2025 snapshot)

  • Hyperledger Fabric 3.1 is stable, with SmartBFT for BFT ordering and performance improvements like batched chaincode writes; v2.5 remains the LTS line with regular patches. Ed25519 support and gossip deprecations are notable governance/ops changes. (github.com)
  • Besu tracks Ethereum’s roadmap and continues strengthening private‑network features (QBFT recommended for enterprise), plus permissioning and sync/perf updates; history‑expiry work has been exercised on Sepolia in 2025. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • FireFly 1.4.0 added a Cardano connector and continues to harden token/data/event abstractions across EVM and Fabric. (hyperledger.github.io)
  • Bevel shipped v1.3.0 (April 2025), improved logging/diagnostics, and is working to standardize Fabric 3.0 deployment paths (charts/playbooks). (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)
  • Cacti advanced connectors and SATP workstreams (alpha releases in 2024–2025), consolidating the Cactus/Weaver lineage into a cleaner, security‑focused codebase. (github.com)
  • Aries projects moved under the OpenWallet Foundation; Indy remains stable; AnonCreds v2 (including BBS) is active—useful for privacy‑preserving credentials in regulated sectors. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)

Choosing the right Hyperledger building blocks

1) Hyperledger Fabric: Permissioned data sharing at enterprise scale

Use Fabric when multiple organizations must write to a shared ledger but keep some data private. In 2025, specific capabilities tilt the decision toward Fabric:

  • Private Data Collections (PDCs) let subsets of orgs share encrypted state that’s validated network‑wide via on‑chain hashes—no separate channels needed. You can query by range, partial composite keys, and (with CouchDB) rich JSON queries; you can also purge via blockToLive. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • SmartBFT ordering (v3) tolerates Byzantine behavior (3f+1 orderers to withstand f faults). Plan for 4 nodes minimum and 7+ for production resilience; expect higher bandwidth/latency than Raft. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
  • Performance gains: v3.1 adds batched writes and batched reads (GetMultipleKeys) for chaincode that touches many keys—material for high‑fanout updates. (github.com)
  • Governance/crypto updates: Ed25519 support and deprecations around gossip block dissemination streamline ops and futureproof crypto choices. (github.com)
  • HSM integration via PKCS#11 for peers/orderers and CA flows (SoftHSM for test; vendor HSMs for FIPS). (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • LTS clarity: 2.5 is the current LTS; 2.2 was retired by major vendors—factor this into upgrade plans. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)

When not to pick Fabric: if you need EVM bytecode, Solidity tooling, or public‑chain composability from day one. Use Besu (below) and pair with Fabric later if you need highly private workflows.

Practical example: retail traceability
Walmart’s food traceability runs on Fabric (via IBM Food Trust), demonstrating seconds‑level tracebacks and category expansion to multiple product lines—strong evidence for complex retail supply chains. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)

Implementation notes we apply in projects:

  • Topology: For SmartBFT orderers, design for 7 nodes across 3+ orgs; for Raft, 5 nodes across 3 orgs is a typical baseline. Tune block size and batch timeout based on peak TPS and latency SLOs. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
  • Chaincode: For high‑write workloads, adopt v3.1 batch write APIs and composite keys consistently; add CouchDB indexes (META‑INF) for heavy query paths. (github.com)
  • Privacy: Prefer explicit PDCs for well‑defined data sharing; use implicit org collections for simple per‑org state. Set blockToLive for right‑to‑be‑forgotten patterns and archive off‑chain. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)

Emerging research worth watching:
Work on DAG‑aware execution and cross‑shard concurrency shows promising throughput gains and new fairness mitigations—useful for roadmap planning even if not merged upstream yet. (arxiv.org)

2) Hyperledger Besu: Enterprise EVM for private and public touchpoints

Pick Besu when you want:

  • EVM compatibility in private networks with enterprise‑grade PoA (QBFT recommended) and fast finality. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • Production permissioning: node and account allowlists (including DNS support for K8s) with live updates via JSON‑RPC. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • Smooth forks with evolving Ethereum standards and ongoing performance/sync improvements (e.g., pre‑merge history expiry testing in 2025). (github.com)

Implementation notes we apply:

  • Consensus: default to QBFT; keep requestTimeoutseconds ≈ 2× blockperiodseconds; monitor round changes and signer metrics. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • Bootstrap: use the Quorum Genesis Tool to codify genesis settings, validator keys, gas limits, and epoch lengths; version it alongside infra code. (github.com)
  • Governance: standardize the permissions_config.toml across members; expose PERM APIs to on‑board/off‑board orgs safely. (besu.hyperledger.org)

When not to pick Besu: if you need sub‑ledger privacy tied to specific counterparties and auditors per transaction without duplicating networks—Fabric’s PDC model is stronger there. Pair Besu (for EVM/token flows) and Fabric (for private state) if needed.

3) Hyperledger FireFly: Ship features faster (tokens, events, data)

FireFly is a “supernode” that abstracts multiparty app patterns: message pinning, tokenization (ERC‑20/721/1155), file exchange, off‑chain/on‑chain sync, and contract listeners—wrapping Fabric and EVM backends behind a consistent API. Recent updates added a Cardano connector and deepened token and connector frameworks. (hyperledger.github.io)

Why this matters:

  • Shortens build time for apps that mix data, assets, and events across orgs.
  • Gives you ERC‑1155 multi‑asset flows or ERC‑20/721 with minimal glue code. (hyperledger.github.io)
  • Works with Besu/Quorum via ethconnect and with Fabric via fabconnect—so you can swap chains without rewriting business logic. (github.com)

When FireFly is a fit: MVPs that must pass security review quickly; projects that need token flows, reliable eventing, and “private messages + on‑chain proofs” out of the box.

4) Hyperledger Cacti: Interoperate without a third‑party chain

Use Cacti when you need cross‑network operations:

  • Asset exchanges/transfers (HTLCs for ETH/ERC‑20), ledger data sharing, and identity decoupling—without changing underlying DLTs. Current connectors cover Fabric and Besu, with active cleanup and SATP/Hermes initiatives. (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)

Our go‑to pattern:

  • Keep assets on their native chains (e.g., invoices or SKUs as Fabric states; settlement tokens on a Besu network).
  • Orchestrate atomic swaps or verified reads via Cacti relays/connectors, with audit trails stamped on both sides. (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)

5) Hyperledger Bevel: GitOps/K8s for day‑2 reliability

Bevel provides opinionated Helm charts and Ansible playbooks to deploy and operate Fabric, Besu, Quorum, and more across clouds; v1.3.0 (Apr 2025) improved logging/diagnostics and is working toward Fabric 3.0 rollout paths. Use this when you want repeatable, vendor‑neutral infra automation. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)

6) Indy/AnonCreds (and the Aries transition): Privacy‑preserving identity

  • Indy is a stable verifiable data registry project with ongoing security posture improvements; pick it for long‑lived DID networks. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)
  • AnonCreds v2 work adds pluggable signature schemes (PS/BBS), enabling unlinkable proofs and scalable revocation—aligned with modern VC ecosystems. (lf-hyperledger.atlassian.net)
  • Aries subprojects like ACA‑Py and Credo moved to the OpenWallet Foundation in 2025, but you can still integrate via SDKs and plugins (e.g., Hedera plugin for ACA‑Py). Plan for this new home in your roadmaps. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)

Use this stack when you need KYC/credentials with privacy guarantees (e.g., age‑over‑18, role‑based access) and want wallet/app interoperability.

A practical decision framework (no fluff)

  • Pick Fabric if:
    • Your data is the product (supply chain, compliance, multiparty operations).
    • You need counterparty‑selective privacy and audit trails (PDCs with blockToLive).
    • Governance is the hard problem (multi‑org endorsements, channel ACLs).
  • Pick Besu if:
    • You want Solidity tooling and EVM compatibility in a permissioned setting.
    • You might later anchor or bridge to public Ethereum.
    • You need token logic and smart contract ecosystems out of the box.
  • Add FireFly if:
    • You need to deliver tokens/data/events fast with robust APIs and webhooks.
  • Add Cacti if:
    • You must cross ledgers (Fabric↔Besu) without inventing a custom bridge.
  • Use Bevel if:
    • You need repeatable, auditable, multi‑cloud infra as code for day‑2 ops.
  • Use Indy/AnonCreds if:
    • You need privacy‑preserving credentials with verifiable presentations.

Two concrete solution patterns with 2025 specifics

  1. Regulated supply chain (retail/food, pharma cold‑chain)
  • Ledger: Fabric 3.1 with SmartBFT (7 orderers/3 orgs), CouchDB state, HSM via PKCS#11 for peers/orderers. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
  • App layer: FireFly for messages (COAs, shipping docs), tokenized batch IDs (ERC‑1155 if bridging to EVM later), and event listeners for recalls. (hyperledger.github.io)
  • Privacy: PDCs separating supplier pricing from retailer ops; purge stale sensitive data with blockToLive. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • Reference impact: Walmart’s production deployment shows seconds‑level tracebacks and scalability across product lines—aligns with the architecture above. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
  1. Financial ops and settlement (consortium treasury, loyalty, trade assets)
  • Ledgers: Fabric for private reference data and approvals; Besu (QBFT) for on‑chain settlement token and programmable payouts. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • Interop: Cacti for atomic swaps and verified reads (e.g., payment vs. delivery). (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)
  • App layer: FireFly tokens API to mint/transfer with data‑rich events; contract listeners for ERP triggers. (hyperledger.github.io)

2025 emerging best practices we implement at 7Block Labs

  • Fabric SmartBFT sizing: Start with 7 orderers for f=2 tolerance and maintenance headroom; isolate orderers on separate subnets and throttle gRPC at the edge. Expect higher latencies vs Raft; target “seconds, not sub‑second” finality. (lfdecentralizedtrust.org)
  • Chaincode performance: Use v3.1 batching (StartWriteBatch/FinishWriteBatch) and the new GetMultipleKeys read batching to slash endorsement chatter for key‑dense transactions. (github.com)
  • Data modeling: Consistently design composite keys (type~id) and index hotspots; keep large payloads off‑chain via FireFly’s data exchange, pin hashes on‑chain. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • Privacy posture: Prefer explicit PDCs for multi‑org sharing; implicit org collections for per‑org secrets; codify blockToLive to enforce data minimization. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)
  • Besu governance: Enforce node/account allowlists; use DNS‑aware enode URLs for K8s; monitor qbft_getSignerMetrics to preempt validator issues. (besu.hyperledger.org)
  • Interop “don’t roll your own”: Use Cacti’s vetted connectors for atomic swaps and data sharing instead of bespoke bridges; track SATP updates. (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)
  • Delivery velocity with FireFly: Treat token pools as infrastructure; standardize on ERC‑1155 for multi‑asset portfolios; wire contract listeners to webhook relays for downstream systems. (hyperledger.github.io)
  • Security toolchain: Integrate HSMs via PKCS#11; on the app layer and connectors, enable CodeQL and SAST—FireFly projects have moved to CodeQL and regular CVE triage in 2025. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)

Build/operate plan we typically propose

  • Discovery (2–3 weeks)
    • Fit assessment (Fabric vs Besu vs hybrid), privacy map (PDC candidates), interop scope (Cacti), and app needs (FireFly).
    • Throughput/latency SLOs tied to business events (e.g., recall, payout, onboarding).
  • Architecture and landing zone (2–4 weeks)
  • MVP (6–10 weeks)
    • Chaincode/contracts with batch APIs (Fabric 3.1), ERC‑1155 pools if relevant, FireFly setup, Cacti flows for cross‑ledger.
  • Hardening & scale (4–6 weeks)
    • HSM integration; permissioning/rotation runbooks; perf tests with synthetic peaks; dashboards for signer metrics and gossip/delivery queues. (hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io)

Deliverables: threat model; governance policy templates; ops runbooks; IaC; SLO dashboards; Go/Node/Java client SDKs (Fabric Gateway) with zero‑trust patterns. (github.com)

Managed services: when to consider them

If your priority is reduced infra overhead, managed Fabric offerings can help (e.g., AMB for Hyperledger Fabric with well‑documented pricing and GovCloud support). The trade‑off is feature velocity versus open deployment options (e.g., upgrading to Fabric 3.x). We often prototype on AMB for speed then migrate to Bevel‑driven K8s for full control. (aws.amazon.com)

Anti‑patterns (hard‑earned)

  • Using Besu solely to mimic Fabric‑style private data; you’ll churn reinventing PDC‑like policies in Solidity.
  • Standing up Fabric 2.2 fresh in 2025—upgrade budgets explode later; start on 2.5 LTS or 3.x if SmartBFT is in scope. (lf-decentralized-trust.github.io)
  • Rolling your own cross‑chain relays; security review and maintenance will dominate your TCO. Use Cacti. (hyperledger-cacti.github.io)

RFP checklist (reuse these)

  • Which data objects must be private to subsets of members, and for how long (blockToLive)?
  • Do we require BFT fault tolerance (3f+1) or is Raft (2f+1) sufficient?
  • EVM compatibility today, or only future anchoring/bridging?
  • Interop flows across ledgers (asset swap vs. data read‑with‑proof)?
  • HSM requirements and FIPS posture (PKCS#11)?
  • Automation target (Bevel/K8s) and upgrade path to Fabric 3.x?
  • App‑level features: tokens, events, off‑chain file exchange—can FireFly cover 80%?

Final word

Hyperledger is a pragmatic bet in 2025. Fabric gives you privacy, governance, and BFT options; Besu gives you EVM plus permissioned control; FireFly and Cacti give you the glue to ship fast and interoperate safely; Bevel keeps it operable; Indy/AnonCreds protect user privacy. If you map those capabilities to your exact collaboration model and control plane, you can de‑risk fast and get real value into production.

Want a 2‑hour fit workshop with architects from 7Block Labs? We’ll bring a draft topology, governance model, and a milestone plan tailored to your use case.

Sources

Like what you're reading? Let's build together.

Get a free 30‑minute consultation with our engineering team.

Talk to usView services

Related Posts

7BlockLabs

Full-stack blockchain product studio: DeFi, dApps, audits, integrations.

7Block Labs is a trading name of JAYANTH TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED.

Registered in England and Wales (Company No. 16589283).

Registered Office address: Office 13536, 182-184 High Street North, East Ham, London, E6 2JA.

© 2025 7BlockLabs. All rights reserved.