Audit log

Every state-changing event for Drift Protocol: moderation decisions on community submissions, plus corrections and updates from the news pipeline. URL-based decisions carry three independent witnesses — the original source, an Internet Archive snapshot taken at submission time, and a Solana memo signed by our publicly-disclosed publisher key.

1. #1reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-05-10 05:40:03Z
   Score: 22 → 22 (no score change)
   Generally well-sourced and factually accurate. Core facts confirmed by multiple tier-1 sources. Most material discrepancy: CCTP bridging window stated as 8 hours but reported as 6 hours by ZachXBT and Nexus Mutual. Solana TVL drop of 12% likely understated vs 14-17% consensus. OFAC/CAATSA legal authority conflation is technical but not fabricated.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 418,765,547

   sig

   42NTYF4rTTCg…ftjit2dtcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   Br7YvPrbdrf1…F5x5xa7zcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (699 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-05-10T05:40:03.309Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"50227794-5b4a-4d07-97d3-2fae3507b3e0","new_score":22,"page_slug":"drift-protocol","prev_score":22,"reason":"Generally well-sourced and factually accurate. Core facts confirmed by multiple tier-1 sources. Most material discrepancy: CCTP bridging window stated as 8 hours but reported as 6 hours by ZachXBT and Nexus Mutual. Solana TVL drop of 12% likely understated vs 14-17% consensus. OFAC/CAATSA legal authority conflation is technical but not fabricated.","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 07d491e2-f83e-4074-96f8-e4943b6baac1copy
2. #2review approveby judgejudge

   2026-05-10 05:40:03Z
   Score: 22 → 22 (no score change)
   The reviewer evaluated 35 claims and found a disputed rate of 5.7% (1 of 35), which falls within the 0-10% approval band. The single disputed claim — Solana DeFi TVL dropping 12% after the exploit (claim_findings[33]) vs. a consensus range of 14-17% — is a peripheral contagion-impact metric that does not affect any core allegation about the exploit mechanism, attacker identity, or financial losses. The CCTP bridging window stated as 8 hours (claim_findings[17] and claim_findings[27]) is classified as partially supported rather than disputed because the dollar amount ($232M) and transaction count (100+) are confirmed by multiple Tier 1 sources; only the window duration varies between sources. The OFAC/CAATSA legal authority conflation (claim_findings[26]) is a technical imprecision that does not constitute fabrication. No link rot or stale citations were identified. Two high-priority coverage gaps — on-chain transaction hash verification and Circle's legal response to the class action — are expansion opportunities, not accuracy failures, and do not affect approval under the applicable decision rules.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 418,765,555

   sig

   2pj6pr7j3ee4…nG6fputNcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   9uddDSjMgG7K…6eK1mG7icopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1471 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-10T05:40:03.309Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"50227794-5b4a-4d07-97d3-2fae3507b3e0","new_score":22,"page_slug":"drift-protocol","prev_score":22,"reason":"The reviewer evaluated 35 claims and found a disputed rate of 5.7% (1 of 35), which falls within the 0-10% approval band. The single disputed claim — Solana DeFi TVL dropping 12% after the exploit (claim_findings[33]) vs. a consensus range of 14-17% — is a peripheral contagion-impact metric that does not affect any core allegation about the exploit mechanism, attacker identity, or financial losses. The CCTP bridging window stated as 8 hours (claim_findings[17] and claim_findings[27]) is classified as partially supported rather than disputed because the dollar amount ($232M) and transaction count (100+) are confirmed by multiple Tier 1 sources; only the window duration varies between sources. The OFAC/CAATSA legal authority conflation (claim_findings[26]) is a technical imprecision that does not constitute fabrication. No link rot or stale citations were identified. Two high-priority coverage gaps — on-chain transaction hash verification and Circle's legal response to the class action — are expansion opportunities, not accuracy failures, and do not affect approval under the applicable decision rules.","score_delta":0,"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 f5664430-529e-4955-b4c8-ab81d958dc93copy
3. #3reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-05-10 06:52:12Z
   Score: 22 → 22 (no score change)
   The Drift Protocol investigation page is well-sourced and factually accurate across the majority of its 31 verified claims, with all core assertions about the April 2026 exploit amount, attacker attribution, DPRK context, recovery plan, Tether rescue package, and class action litigation confirmed by credible primary and secondary sources. The most notable internal inconsistency is the combination of '12 minutes' (which describes the 31 withdrawal transactions per TRM Labs) with the stated drain window of 16:05 to 18:31 UTC (which spans approximately 2.5 hours); these represent different phases of the attack and should be disambiguated. The DRIFT token ATH price of $2.96 is supported by CoinGecko but diverges across aggregators. One claim about NYDFS video verification guidance is unverifiable to its primary regulatory document. No claims directly contradict more credible sources, and no link rot was detected among sources that could be fetched.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 418,776,276

   sig

   2HSn1wSbudSw…baxsC41kcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   8JGeuuQk2Zmv…JNf1LsXfcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1308 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-05-10T06:52:12.119Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"50227794-5b4a-4d07-97d3-2fae3507b3e0","new_score":22,"page_slug":"drift-protocol","prev_score":22,"reason":"The Drift Protocol investigation page is well-sourced and factually accurate across the majority of its 31 verified claims, with all core assertions about the April 2026 exploit amount, attacker attribution, DPRK context, recovery plan, Tether rescue package, and class action litigation confirmed by credible primary and secondary sources. The most notable internal inconsistency is the combination of '12 minutes' (which describes the 31 withdrawal transactions per TRM Labs) with the stated drain window of 16:05 to 18:31 UTC (which spans approximately 2.5 hours); these represent different phases of the attack and should be disambiguated. The DRIFT token ATH price of $2.96 is supported by CoinGecko but diverges across aggregators. One claim about NYDFS video verification guidance is unverifiable to its primary regulatory document. No claims directly contradict more credible sources, and no link rot was detected among sources that could be fetched.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"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 eb45ac3d-9cd3-4df5-830c-171c66cae2c6copy
4. #4review approveby judgejudge

   2026-05-10 06:52:12Z
   Score: 22 → 22 (no score change)
   The reviewer evaluated 31 claims and found zero disputed findings, 24 confirmed, 5 partially supported, and 1 unverifiable, yielding a disputed_pct of 3.2% — well within the 0-10% approval threshold. All core allegations about the April 2026 exploit amount, UNC4736/DPRK attribution at medium-high confidence, CCTP laundering path, Tether rescue package, and class action filing are confirmed by Tier 1 sources including Chainalysis, Elliptic, TRM Labs, Bloomberg, and CoinDesk. The most significant editorial issue is an internal inconsistency in claim_findings[10]: the page combines '12 minutes' (describing the 31 withdrawal transactions per TRM Labs) with the stated drain window of 16:05-18:31 UTC (approximately 2.5 hours), which refer to different attack phases and should be disambiguated. The NYDFS video verification claim (claim_findings[30]) remains unverifiable against a primary regulatory document and should either be directly sourced or qualified as a secondary characterization. No link rot, stale citations, or high-priority coverage gaps were identified.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 418,776,279

   sig

   5b4Qt33TH2Fx…WjB5xfaccopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   2zi9XzZGf7JL…UBQXw8Xvcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1430 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-10T06:52:12.119Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"50227794-5b4a-4d07-97d3-2fae3507b3e0","new_score":22,"page_slug":"drift-protocol","prev_score":22,"reason":"The reviewer evaluated 31 claims and found zero disputed findings, 24 confirmed, 5 partially supported, and 1 unverifiable, yielding a disputed_pct of 3.2% — well within the 0-10% approval threshold. All core allegations about the April 2026 exploit amount, UNC4736/DPRK attribution at medium-high confidence, CCTP laundering path, Tether rescue package, and class action filing are confirmed by Tier 1 sources including Chainalysis, Elliptic, TRM Labs, Bloomberg, and CoinDesk. The most significant editorial issue is an internal inconsistency in claim_findings[10]: the page combines '12 minutes' (describing the 31 withdrawal transactions per TRM Labs) with the stated drain window of 16:05-18:31 UTC (approximately 2.5 hours), which refer to different attack phases and should be disambiguated. The NYDFS video verification claim (claim_findings[30]) remains unverifiable against a primary regulatory document and should either be directly sourced or qualified as a secondary characterization. No link rot, stale citations, or high-priority coverage gaps were identified.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"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 b09349e0-40c9-49df-a95a-cf6393f28179copy