BIS
BIS Paper No 173: Trusted Execution Environments for Central Banks
Published
Sep 25, 2026
Topics
Trusted execution environments, Confidential computing, Remote attestation, Central bank data collaboration, Supervisory analytics, AML/CFT compliance, Digital asset wallets, Cyber resilience
Executive Summary
The Bank for International Settlements has published BIS Papers No 173, a research paper on trusted execution environments for central banks. The paper is not a rulemaking, standard or supervisory requirement, and it does not introduce filing obligations, effective dates or mandatory technical controls. Its importance is strategic: it sets out how hardware-backed confidential computing could help central banks and regulated institutions analyse sensitive data while limiting access to plaintext information. The paper explains core assurances, including code authenticity, runtime integrity, confidentiality of data in use and remote attestation, while emphasising that these controls are conditional and must be supported by governance, auditability and disciplined engineering. For firms, the near-term impact is mainly on technology strategy, cloud risk assessment, digital asset key management, data collaboration pilots and procurement. Institutions involved in supervisory analytics, payment systems, fraud detection or confidential data-sharing should treat the paper as an authoritative reference for future engagement with central banks, not as a binding compliance change.
What Changed
New
BIS Paper No 173 sets out a non-binding analytical framework for evaluating TEEs in central bank and regulated-sector contexts.
New
Remote attestation, allow lists, policy binding and mTLS are presented as key mechanisms for releasing secrets only to approved measured states.
New
Use cases include official statistics collaboration, systemic stress testing, fraud detection, financial compliance checks, digital asset wallets and cyber resilience.
New
TEE adoption is presented as conditional on layered controls, evidence-based governance, audit logs, revocation, secure builds and output controls.
New
Procurement should address attestation evidence, trust anchors, software hashes, firmware minima, revocation, SBOMs, signed builds, output rules and audit artefacts.
Business Impact
Who is affected
Directly affected
central banks, supervisory authorities, official statistics functions, payment system operators and public-sector technology teams evaluating confidential computing.
Indirectly affected
regulated financial institutions, payment service providers, cloud providers, regtech vendors, digital asset infrastructure providers and firms participating in supervisory data-sharing or confidential analytics pilots.
Jurisdictions
Global
Business processes
Confidential data collaboration and analytics, Supervisory technology and regulatory data architecture, Cloud and outsourcing technology risk assessment, Digital asset wallet and key management design, Fraud detection and AML/CFT analytics model governance, Cyber resilience and incident response planning, Technology procurement and vendor due diligence
Estimated effort
Medium
Compliance risk
Low
Affected Reports
| Field | Validation rule |
|---|
Recommended Actions
- 1AI generatedStep 1 of 7
classify this as non-binding regulatory intelligence, but brief technology risk, data, compliance and digital asset teams on its relevance to future central bank pilots.
- 2AI generatedStep 2 of 7
inventory existing or planned use cases involving confidential analytics, cross-institution data-sharing, digital asset signing keys, fraud detection, AML/CFT screening or sensitive cloud workloads.
- 3AI generatedStep 3 of 7
where TEEs are being piloted, document the attestation model, approved software hashes, firmware requirements, trust anchors, key-release conditions and revocation process.
- 4AI generatedStep 4 of 7
ensure confidential computing pilots include output governance, such as approved output types, suppression rules, rate limits, query budgets and audit logs, rather than focusing only on memory protection.
- 5AI generatedStep 5 of 7
update vendor due diligence questions to cover TEE evidence formats, attestation service dependencies, SBOMs, signed builds, reproducible builds, incident notification and portability.
- 6AI generatedStep 6 of 7
avoid treating TEEs as a substitute for legal data-sharing authority, privacy assessment, model validation, HSM controls, access management or cyber resilience controls.
- 7AI generatedStep 7 of 7
monitor BIS and relevant central bank publications for any later consultation, pilot or supervisory guidance that converts these concepts into formal expectations.
Timeline
publication
Sep 1, 2026
BIS published BIS Papers No 173, 'Trusted execution environments for central banks'.
Sources
AI-generated analysis is based on the following primary sources. Always verify against the official publication.
- Research paperBank for International SettlementsSep 1, 2026BIS Papers No 173: Trusted execution environments for central banks ↗
https://www.bis.org/publications/paper-173-trusted-execution-environments-central-banks.pdf
Related Evidence
Verified source support for this analysis
The evidence agent checks whether the drafted finding is supported by official publications and relevant public source material.
Receive updates like this by email
Get AI-generated analysis for the regulators and topics you care about.