Public certificate transparency records have surfaced technical configurations that tie Ripple’s systems to a number of major banks.
Published on lookup services such as crt.sh, the logs list bank-owned domains containing the word “ripple” or related identifiers, alongside TLS certificates issued or renewed over recent years.
Bank of America Production Domain Renewed
One entry references a Bank of America address flagged with the label “prod,” pointing to a live production environment.
The certificate was issued to Ripple Labs Inc., first appearing in late October 2023, renewed during 2024, and renewed once more on October 27, 2025. The domain remains active and continues to resolve.
Bank of America has appeared on RippleNet’s member roster for several years, although membership in that messaging network does not, on its own, confirm the use of XRP to settle transactions.
Several More Banks Show Renewed Certificates
Four additional institutions appear in the same public records:
- QNB: rippleqa.qnb.com certificates stretch back to August 2021, with the latest issued August 4, 2026.
- Banorte: certificates under Grupo Financiero Banorte domains, most recently issued in September 2026.
- Scotiabank: certificates first recorded in October 2024, with the newest issued September 28, 2026.
- CIMB: certificates dating to January 2020, the most recent issued in July 2025.
Taken together, the entries indicate that these domains have been actively maintained and their certificates regularly renewed—a pattern consistent with working infrastructure rather than dormant test setups.
What the Certificates Reveal—and What They Don’t
Certificate transparency logs simply confirm that TLS certificates exist for a given domain. A subdomain like rippleqa.qnb.com, or a Bank of America address carrying a “production” label, suggests that Ripple-related systems have been provisioned within the banks’ infrastructure. Years of renewals further suggest those configurations have not been left to lapse.
What the logs cannot show, however, is transaction volume, whether XRP actually functions as a bridge asset, or the extent of any live payment flows. RippleNet can serve purely as a messaging and connectivity layer, operating independently of On-Demand Liquidity and its use of XRP. No recent public statements from the banks have confirmed the scale or nature of any activity connected to these certificates.
Infrastructure Signals vs. Actual Payment Flows
The records offer a technical indication that several banks have kept environments linked to Ripple’s systems in place.
For institutions already known to have explored or joined RippleNet in earlier years, the persistence of these certificates comes as little surprise.
Whether the setups support testing, limited production use, or wider settlement activity can only be established through disclosures that go well beyond public certificate logs.
Also Read
- Democratic Proposal for Crypto Market Structure Legislation | Insights from Former CFTC Commissioner Chris Giancarlo
- Deutsche Bank Launches Digital Asset Custody Service for European Institutions
- MSCI to Decide Whether Strategy Keeps Its Place in Global Indexes After Draft List Flags It for Removal
- BlackRock, SBI Holdings and Startale Group Explore Yen‑Backed Tokenized Funds While XRP’s Role Remains Unclear