Audit log

Every state-changing event for DeepSeek: moderation decisions on community submissions, plus corrections and updates from the news pipeline. URL-based decisions are designed to carry three independent witnesses — the original source, an Internet Archive snapshot, and a Solana memo signed by our publicly-disclosed publisher key. Archive coverage is still being backfilled, so each decision below reports its own snapshot status rather than assuming one exists.

1. #1reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-09-22 22:28:33Z
   Score: 32 → 32 (no score change)
   The page is largely well-sourced and its central claims about the Wiz database exposure, government bans, Khoury College censorship research, Singapore Nvidia chip investigation, and DeepSeek token impersonation scams are confirmed by the cited sources and independent corroboration. The most significant defect is a one-year date error: the page states OpenAI's memo to Congress alleging DeepSeek distillation was submitted February 12, 2025, in both the prose (sections[4]) and the timeline, but the page's own cited FDD source and independent Bloomberg reporting show the memo was actually released February 12, 2026 -- a full year later. This appears to be a transcription error conflating the memo with the earlier (correctly dated) January 29, 2025 Bloomberg report on the Microsoft/OpenAI investigation. A secondary, minor issue is the Singapore fraud-charge date being recorded as the source article's publication date (Feb 28, 2025) rather than the actual charge date (Feb 27, 2025). No link rot was found among the sampled sources; the Khoury, Wiz, and V3 technical-report claims check out precisely against primary sources.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 449,513,533

   sig

   3oKFMiUGrfft…thjUBfjtcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   B4Gbxt6qyz4m…LPHfkcLXcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1705 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"507bfe14a2db888927664572d0e544db","decided_at":"2026-09-22T22:28:32.977Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.3077,"findings_hash":"APLPSrE1hCWLAqRv9MuxgJCPmq5AF1yfQpiF7uFpuwnH","investigation_id":"52937998-58d6-49ab-a8d8-eba48078fd33","new_score":32,"page_content_hash":"95c85275136955a1e2d3b4287b95181f5e4f23b17c02917aa61fe6e9ba2a8257","page_slug":"deepseek","prev_score":32,"reason":"The page is largely well-sourced and its central claims about the Wiz database exposure, government bans, Khoury College censorship research, Singapore Nvidia chip investigation, and DeepSeek token impersonation scams are confirmed by the cited sources and independent corroboration. The most significant defect is a one-year date error: the page states OpenAI's memo to Congress alleging DeepSeek distillation was submitted February 12, 2025, in both the prose (sections[4]) and the timeline, but the page's own cited FDD source and independent Bloomberg reporting show the memo was actually released February 12, 2026 -- a full year later. This appears to be a transcription error conflating the memo with the earlier (correctly dated) January 29, 2025 Bloomberg report on the Microsoft/OpenAI investigation. A secondary, minor issue is the Singapore fraud-charge date being recorded as the source article's publication date (Feb 28, 2025) rather than the actual charge date (Feb 27, 2025). No link rot was found among the sampled sources; the Khoury, Wiz, and V3 technical-report claims check out precisely against primary sources.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":1,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision e5653dd4-5f6a-4a24-a64a-98958f297e60copy
2. #2review reviseby judgejudge

   2026-09-22 22:28:33Z
   Score: 32 → 17 (-15)
   Of the 13 individual claims the reviewer checked, 4 came back disputed, which crosses the 30% threshold for this tier. All of the page's central allegations -- the exposed database (claim_findings[0]), government bans (claim_findings[1]-[2]), the OpenAI/Microsoft distillation allegation itself (claim_findings[3]), the Singapore Nvidia chip probe (claim_findings[6]-[7]), the censorship research (claim_findings[10]), and the fake-token scams (claim_findings[9]) -- were confirmed against cited sources. The disputed items are all dating errors, not disputes of substance: three of the four (claim_findings[3], [4], [5]) are the same underlying mistake -- the page states OpenAI's memo to Congress was submitted February 12, 2025, when the page's own cited source and independent reporting date it to February 12, 2026, a one-year transcription error appearing in both prose and the timeline. The fourth (claim_findings[6]) is a one-day discrepancy where a Singapore fraud-charge date was recorded as the source article's publish date rather than the charge date. No link rot, no disputed core allegations, and the reviewer rated its own confidence at 0.8. Given the crossing of the 30% line is driven by a single repeated date error being logged three times rather than three independent factual disputes, this is placed at the low end of the penalty range for this tier.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 449,513,538

   sig

   5CyLmfxno9jR…xh4cLeUmcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   GwSDiuhm4xzd…bXJmLHVucopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1846 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"507bfe14a2db888927664572d0e544db","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-09-22T22:28:32.977Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.3077,"investigation_id":"52937998-58d6-49ab-a8d8-eba48078fd33","new_score":17,"page_slug":"deepseek","prev_score":32,"reason":"Of the 13 individual claims the reviewer checked, 4 came back disputed, which crosses the 30% threshold for this tier. All of the page's central allegations -- the exposed database (claim_findings[0]), government bans (claim_findings[1]-[2]), the OpenAI/Microsoft distillation allegation itself (claim_findings[3]), the Singapore Nvidia chip probe (claim_findings[6]-[7]), the censorship research (claim_findings[10]), and the fake-token scams (claim_findings[9]) -- were confirmed against cited sources. The disputed items are all dating errors, not disputes of substance: three of the four (claim_findings[3], [4], [5]) are the same underlying mistake -- the page states OpenAI's memo to Congress was submitted February 12, 2025, when the page's own cited source and independent reporting date it to February 12, 2026, a one-year transcription error appearing in both prose and the timeline. The fourth (claim_findings[6]) is a one-day discrepancy where a Singapore fraud-charge date was recorded as the source article's publish date rather than the charge date. No link rot, no disputed core allegations, and the reviewer rated its own confidence at 0.8. Given the crossing of the 30% line is driven by a single repeated date error being logged three times rather than three independent factual disputes, this is placed at the low end of the penalty range for this tier.","score_delta":-15,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision d61fbd64-161a-45e4-9361-ae07efc7f36fcopy