Cognitive Migration Infrastructure Framework: Blockchain-Based Trust Architecture for the EU Eastern Border

Authors

  • Sergiu-Lucian Sorcaru Danubius University of Galati
  • Alisa-Mihaela Ambrozie Danubius International University
  • Ionel Sergiu Pirju Danubius International University
  • Camelia Arama (Panfiloiu) Danubius International University

Keywords:

EU border management, Self-Sovereign Identity, Administrative Discontinuity, permissioned blockchain, EIBM resilience

Abstract

The February 2022 Russian military invasion of Ukraine triggered the arrival of over four million displaced persons into the European Union within a compressed timeframe. The identity verification architecture underpinning EU border management had no defined response. EES was not yet operational. ETIAS was inapplicable. The origin-state civil registry, on which both systems depend, was unavailable. Border officers processed millions of third-country nationals without a functioning verification chain, relying on ad hoc national procedures outside existing EU regulation.

This article argues that the failure was not operational but architectural. Regulation (EU) 2019/817 builds EU border interoperability on the assumption that the origin state is always reachable. The article identifies this assumption as a Single Point of Failure and proposes the Cognitive Migration Infrastructure Framework (CMIF), a four-layer permissioned blockchain architecture that preserves verified identity continuity at the EU’s eastern borders when origin-state authorities are absent. CMIF combines Self-Sovereign Identity credentials, a statutory anomaly filter with final decisions reserved to the human officer, a Delegated Trust Mechanism for absent-state scenarios, and a three-level degraded mode protocol with measurable operational parameters. A formal stress test based on the Ukraine 2022 crisis demonstrates where the current architecture fails and where CMIF remains operational.

References

1. Akhison, G. (2025). Towards a universal digital identity: A blockchain-based framework for borderless verification. Frontiers in Blockchain, 8, 1688287. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbloc.2025.1688287

2. Ambrozie, A. M., & Sorcaru, S. (2022). Logistics in a green era, a blockchain-based framework. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, 18(6).

3. Beduschi, A. (2021). International migration management in the age of artificial intelligence. Migration Studies, 9(3), 576–596. https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnaa003

4. Chatzis, P., & Stavrou, E. (2021). Cyber-threat landscape of border control infrastructures. Applied Cyber Security Research Laboratory, University of Central Lancashire Cyprus.

5. Coman, I. (2025). Large-scale integration of technical systems in cross-border police cooperation management. In H. Takemura & S. O. Michael (Eds.), Public law at the crossroads of technology, jurisprudence and governance in contemporary Europe (pp. 198–208). ADJURIS. https://doi.org/10.62768/ADJURIS/2025/4/13

6. Council of the European Union. (2022). Council implementing decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine. Official Journal of the European Union, L 71, 4.3.2022.

7. Csatlós, E. (2025). Blending digitalization and enhanced security: Exploring the role of ETIAS in migration control and its administrative structure. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 65(3), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2024.00508

8. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2019). Regulation (EU) 2019/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on establishing a framework for interoperability between EU information systems in the field of borders and visa. Official Journal of the European Union, L 135, 22.5.2019. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/817/oj

9. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2019). Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard. Official Journal of the European Union, L 295, 14.11.2019. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/1896/oj

10. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1183 amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing the European Digital Identity Framework. Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1183/oj

11. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act). Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj

12. European Union. (2024). European Digital Identity Wallet Architecture and Reference Framework (v2.8.0). https://eu-digital-identity-wallet.github.io/eudi-doc-architecture-and-reference-framework/latest/

13. Forti, M. (2021). Blockchain-driven identification procedures in the migration context: Regulatory challenges and fundamental rights issues. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3866594

14. Forti, M. (2024). Addressing algorithmic errors in data-driven border control procedures. German Law Journal, 25, 635–645. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.102

15. Matta, S. S., & Bolli, M. (2022). Blockchain-based decentralized identity for cross-border authentication: Enhancing cybersecurity and immigration applications. ASRC Procedia: Global Perspectives in Science and Scholarship, 2(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.63125/sr1rz960

16. Musco Eklund, A. (2023). Rule of law challenges of “algorithmic discretion” and automation in EU border control: A case study of ETIAS through the lens of legality. European Journal of Migration and Law, 25(3), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340152

17. Shafin, K. M., & Reno, S. (2025). A byzantine-resistant blockchain framework for secure and scalable immigration management. Scientific Reports, 15, 32338. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-10235-3

18. Sorcaru, S. L., Nuta, F. M., Topliceanu, S. C., & Ambrozie, A. M. (2023). Measuring the FDI attractiveness in the EAP countries from an institutional perspective. Journal of business economics and management, 24(6), 1019-1041.

19. Van Den Meerssche, D. (2022). Virtual borders: International law and the elusive inequalities of algorithmic association. European Journal of International Law, 33(1), 171–204. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chac007

20. Velasco Rico, C. I., & Laukyte, M. (2024). ETIAS system and new proposals to advance the use of AI in public services. Computer Law & Security Review, 54, 106015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106015

21. World Wide Web Consortium. (2022). Decentralized identifiers (DIDs) v1.0. W3C Recommendation, 19 July 2022. https://www.w3.org/TR/did-1.0/

Downloads

Published

2026-10-12

Issue

Section

International Relations in the Contemporary World. Geopolitics and Diplomacy