Audit log

Every state-changing event for Ethereum Classic: 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. #1publishby system:backfill

   2026-05-14 06:02:26Z
   Score: ? → ? (no score change)
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 419,628,885

   sig

   5cEkiL5UKe88…M22fdcvwcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   AFEcHdK5UWeH…oK9y6YJocopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (9770 B) ▸

   {"actor":"system:backfill","investigation_id":"2ae2325a-238e-4228-b183-6f8ca733d750","kind":"publish","page_slug":"ethereum-classic","published_at":"2026-05-14T06:02:26.138Z","sequence_num":1,"snapshot":{"content_type":"investigation","entity_name":"Ethereum Classic","sections":[{"content":"In June 2016, $60M was drained from The DAO via a reentrancy exploit. A July 2016 hard fork at block 1,920,000 reversed the theft, creating Ethereum (ETH). Ethereum Classic preserved the original unaltered ledger. Only 5.5% voter turnout participated in the fork vote.","heading":"DAO Hack and Fork Origin","severity":"low","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Chainlink Blog: DAO Hack","type":"research","url":"https://blog.chain.link/reentrancy-attacks-and-the-dao-hack/"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Ethereum Classic - Wikipedia","type":"other","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic"}]},{"content":"219,500 ETC (~$1.1M) was double-spent in a 51% attack. Coinbase detected and halted ETC transactions. The ETC team initially denied the attack before confirming it.","heading":"51% Attack — January 2019","severity":"critical","sources":[{"credibility":1,"name":"MIT Technology Review: 2019 Attack","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/01/08/137908/hackers-just-stole-1-million-from-the-ethereum-classic-blockchain-in-a-rare-51/"},{"credibility":1,"name":"Coinbase Blog: 2019 Double Spend","type":"official","url":"https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbases-perspective-on-the-recent-ethereum-classic-etc-double-spend"}]},{"content":"Three separate 51% attacks occurred in August 2020. 3,693, then 4,000, then 7,000+ blocks were reorganized. Approximately 807,260 ETC (~$5.6M) was double-spent. The attacker spent less than $200K in rented NiceHash hashrate.","heading":"51% Attacks — August 2020 Triple Attack","severity":"critical","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Third 51% Attack August 2020","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/08/29/ethereum-classic-hit-by-third-51-attack-in-a-month"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Decrypt: $5M Attack","type":"news_article","url":"https://decrypt.co/37721/hacker-nets-over-5-million-ethereum-classic-51-attack"}]},{"content":"Post-Merge hashrate surged to 300+ TH/s as displaced ETH miners migrated. ETC now controls 90-95% of ETChash hashrate. NiceHash incompatibility post-Thanos upgrade raises the cost of attack substantially.","heading":"Hashrate Security — Current","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Ethereum Classic - Wikipedia","type":"other","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic"}]},{"content":"No explicit SEC or CFTC classification for ETC exists. ETC was absent from the March 2026 joint 16-asset commodity list. A 2019 CFTC statement implies commodity-by-analogy to ETH only.","heading":"Regulatory Classification","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":1,"name":"CFTC Press Release 8051-19","type":"regulatory","url":"https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8051-19"}]},{"content":"Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust launched in 2017 with ~$283M NAV as of December 2024. It has historically traded at up to 458% premium and 77% discount. No ETF conversion filing has been identified.","heading":"Grayscale ETCG Trust","severity":"low","sources":[{"credibility":1,"name":"SEC EDGAR: ETCG 10-K","type":"regulatory","url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1705181/000095017024019124/etcg-20231231.htm"},{"credibility":1,"name":"SEC EDGAR: ETCG 10-Q Q3 2024","type":"regulatory","url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1705181/000095017024120128/etcg-20240930.htm"}]},{"content":"ETC has no formal foundation. Development proceeds via rough consensus through the ECIP process. ETC Cooperative is the primary funder. Bob Summerwill departed in December 2024. TVL is approximately $150K with ~31,690 daily transactions.","heading":"Developer Activity and Ecosystem","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"ETC Cooperative 2024 Retrospective","type":"official","url":"https://etccooperative.org/posts/2025-03-14-the-etc-cooperative-2024-retrospective-report-en"}]},{"content":"The proposed Olympia upgrade would redirect base fees to a treasury. A Nolympia petition signed by F2Pool, 2Miners, and Antpool opposes it as a miner tax violating core principles. Testnet went live in April 2026 with mainnet targeted for end of 2026.","heading":"Olympia Upgrade Governance Controversy","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Nolympia Petition","type":"other","url":"https://nolympia.dev/"},{"credibility":2,"name":"ECIP-1111 Olympia","type":"official","url":"https://ecips.ethereumclassic.org/ECIPs/ecip-1111"}]},{"content":"A January 2020 'EAgharta' hard fork scam targeted ETC holders. ETC Dev dissolved in December 2018 with allegations of hostile interference by ETC Labs.","heading":"Ecosystem Scams and Incidents","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinTelegraph: Hard Fork Scam Warning","type":"news_article","url":"https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-classic-cooperative-warns-public-against-apparent-hard-fork-scam"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Block: Board Member Resignation","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.theblock.co/post/58953/ethereum-classic-collective-board-member-resigns-withdraws-funding-support"}]}],"sources_used":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Chainlink Blog: DAO Hack","type":"research","url":"https://blog.chain.link/reentrancy-attacks-and-the-dao-hack/"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Ethereum Classic - Wikipedia","type":"other","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic"},{"credibility":1,"name":"MIT Technology Review: 2019 Attack","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/01/08/137908/hackers-just-stole-1-million-from-the-ethereum-classic-blockchain-in-a-rare-51/"},{"credibility":1,"name":"Coinbase Blog: 2019 Double Spend","type":"official","url":"https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbases-perspective-on-the-recent-ethereum-classic-etc-double-spend"},{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Third 51% Attack","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/08/29/ethereum-classic-hit-by-third-51-attack-in-a-month"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Decrypt: $5M Attack","type":"news_article","url":"https://decrypt.co/37721/hacker-nets-over-5-million-ethereum-classic-51-attack"},{"credibility":1,"name":"CFTC Press Release 8051-19","type":"regulatory","url":"https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8051-19"},{"credibility":1,"name":"SEC EDGAR: ETCG 10-K","type":"regulatory","url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1705181/000095017024019124/etcg-20231231.htm"},{"credibility":2,"name":"ETC Cooperative Retrospective","type":"official","url":"https://etccooperative.org/posts/2025-03-14-the-etc-cooperative-2024-retrospective-report-en"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Nolympia Petition","type":"other","url":"https://nolympia.dev/"},{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinTelegraph: Hard Fork Scam","type":"news_article","url":"https://cointelegraph.com/news/ethereum-classic-cooperative-warns-public-against-apparent-hard-fork-scam"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Block: Board Resignation","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.theblock.co/post/58953/ethereum-classic-collective-board-member-resigns-withdraws-funding-support"}],"summary":"Ethereum Classic (ETC) is the original Ethereum chain that persisted after the 2016 DAO hack hard fork. It has suffered three documented 51% attacks totaling over $7M in double-spend losses (2019 and 2020), has minimal DeFi ecosystem depth (~$150K TVL), and faces unresolved governance controversy over the Olympia treasury proposal. Post-Merge hashrate improvements have raised the cost of attack substantially. Grayscale's ETCG trust is SEC-filed with ~$283M NAV. No explicit SEC/CFTC classification exists for ETC.","timeline":[{"date":"2016-06-17","event":"$60M drained from The DAO via reentrancy exploit","source":"chain.link","source_url":"https://blog.chain.link/reentrancy-attacks-and-the-dao-hack/"},{"date":"2016-07-20","event":"Ethereum hard fork at block 1,920,000; ETC preserves original chain","source":"wikipedia.org","source_url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic"},{"date":"2019-01-07","event":"51% attack: 219,500 ETC (~$1.1M) double-spent","source":"technologyreview.com","source_url":"https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/01/08/137908/hackers-just-stole-1-million-from-the-ethereum-classic-blockchain-in-a-rare-51/"},{"date":"2020-08-01","event":"First of three 51% attacks in August 2020; 3,693 blocks reorganized","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/08/29/ethereum-classic-hit-by-third-51-attack-in-a-month"},{"date":"2020-08-06","event":"Second 51% attack: 4,000 blocks reorganized","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/08/29/ethereum-classic-hit-by-third-51-attack-in-a-month"},{"date":"2020-08-29","event":"Third 51% attack: 7,000+ blocks reorganized; ~$5.6M double-spent total","source":"decrypt.co","source_url":"https://decrypt.co/37721/hacker-nets-over-5-million-ethereum-classic-51-attack"},{"date":"2022-09-15","event":"Ethereum Merge causes ETH miners to migrate to ETC; hashrate surges","source":"wikipedia.org","source_url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic"},{"date":"2024-12-01","event":"Bob Summerwill departs ETC Cooperative","source":"etccooperative.org","source_url":"https://etccooperative.org/posts/2025-03-14-the-etc-cooperative-2024-retrospective-report-en"},{"date":"2026-04-01","event":"Olympia upgrade testnet goes live amid governance controversy","source":"ecips.ethereumclassic.org","source_url":"https://ecips.ethereumclassic.org/ECIPs/ecip-1111"}]},"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 1125c82a-ff65-47ed-865b-870f0e39c590copy
2. #2reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-06-14 23:16:09Z
   Score: 42 → 42 (no score change)
   Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Ethereum Classic is a legitimate, long-running proof-of-work blockchain (operational since 2016) that suffered external 51% attacks in 2019 and 2020 — incidents it was the victim of, not the perpetrator. Those attacks are now 4-6 years old and have been substantially mitigated by the ~7-8x hashrate increase following Ethereum's 2022 Merge, which is confirmed by multiple sources. The current WARNING band (20-49) requires either 'elevated fraud/loss risk' or 'unresolved severe incident'; neither condition applies — the security incidents are resolved, and there is zero evidence of fraud, Ponzi mechanics, or exit scam. Material caveats that do justify a CAUTIONARY rating include: (1) extremely minimal DeFi ecosystem (~$74.6K TVL, not the $150K stated), (2) contentious on-chain governance via the Olympia proposal still in development, (3) no explicit SEC/CFTC classification (though the March 2026 joint framework did not name ETC, the broader regulatory environment has evolved), and (4) a small-cap coin with heavy speculative price exposure. A score of 58/CAUTIONARY properly reflects a legitimate operator with material structural caveats, without penalizing it for being a victim of attacks it has since defended against. Two specific factual inaccuracies on the page — hashrate stated as '300+ TH/s' (current: ~165-198 TH/s) and TVL stated as '~$150K' (current: ~$74.6K) — modestly reduce confidence in the page's precision but do not change the band direction.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 426,514,700

   sig

   Zrzjp5CVd6af…KeErEqNLcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   HGgkRjW24Ktb…HNtUkKk8copysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1969 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:09.909Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"2ae2325a-238e-4228-b183-6f8ca733d750","new_score":42,"page_slug":"ethereum-classic","prev_score":42,"reason":"Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Ethereum Classic is a legitimate, long-running proof-of-work blockchain (operational since 2016) that suffered external 51% attacks in 2019 and 2020 — incidents it was the victim of, not the perpetrator. Those attacks are now 4-6 years old and have been substantially mitigated by the ~7-8x hashrate increase following Ethereum's 2022 Merge, which is confirmed by multiple sources. The current WARNING band (20-49) requires either 'elevated fraud/loss risk' or 'unresolved severe incident'; neither condition applies — the security incidents are resolved, and there is zero evidence of fraud, Ponzi mechanics, or exit scam. Material caveats that do justify a CAUTIONARY rating include: (1) extremely minimal DeFi ecosystem (~$74.6K TVL, not the $150K stated), (2) contentious on-chain governance via the Olympia proposal still in development, (3) no explicit SEC/CFTC classification (though the March 2026 joint framework did not name ETC, the broader regulatory environment has evolved), and (4) a small-cap coin with heavy speculative price exposure. A score of 58/CAUTIONARY properly reflects a legitimate operator with material structural caveats, without penalizing it for being a victim of attacks it has since defended against. Two specific factual inaccuracies on the page — hashrate stated as '300+ TH/s' (current: ~165-198 TH/s) and TVL stated as '~$150K' (current: ~$74.6K) — modestly reduce confidence in the page's precision but do not change the band direction.","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 6f4226a7-209d-4a2d-a961-b6b74c3eb040copy
3. #3review approveby judgejudge

   2026-06-14 23:16:10Z
   Score: 42 → 58 (+16)
   This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All seven claim_findings (indices 0-6) are marked 'supported' and disputed_pct is 0% — the page content stands. The current WARNING-band score of 42 is demonstrably miscalibrated: the band requires either 'elevated fraud/loss risk' or 'unresolved severe incident,' and neither condition holds. The 51% attacks of 2019 and 2020 were perpetrated by external actors against ETC (claim_findings[0]); Ethereum Classic was the victim, not the perpetrator. Post-Merge hashrate has risen approximately 7-8x, making the attack economics prohibitive and the incidents resolved (claim_findings[1]). There is no fraud, Ponzi mechanics, or exit scam in ETC's history (claim_findings[4]). Material caveats that justify a CAUTIONARY rating rather than a clean pass remain valid: the TVL is extremely minimal (~$74.6K, claim_findings[5]), governance contention around the Olympia upgrade is current and unresolved (claim_findings[6]), and no explicit SEC/CFTC classification exists. Two minor factual stale values — hashrate stated as '300+ TH/s' vs. current ~165-198 TH/s (claim_findings[2]) and TVL stated as '~$150K' vs. actual ~$74.6K (claim_findings[5]) — do not affect the band direction. A score of 58/CAUTIONARY correctly reflects a legitimate, long-running blockchain with structural caveats, without penalizing it for being the victim of attacks that have since been substantially defended against. The +16 delta moves the score from 42 to 58 as recommended by the reviewer.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 426,514,703

   sig

   bCagQKQD8UaA…e9Fq4kw3copyexplorer ↗

   hash

   9kFzs5PeZ9HJ…foqpSSEjcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1888 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:09.909Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"2ae2325a-238e-4228-b183-6f8ca733d750","new_score":58,"page_slug":"ethereum-classic","prev_score":42,"reason":"This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All seven claim_findings (indices 0-6) are marked 'supported' and disputed_pct is 0% — the page content stands. The current WARNING-band score of 42 is demonstrably miscalibrated: the band requires either 'elevated fraud/loss risk' or 'unresolved severe incident,' and neither condition holds. The 51% attacks of 2019 and 2020 were perpetrated by external actors against ETC (claim_findings[0]); Ethereum Classic was the victim, not the perpetrator. Post-Merge hashrate has risen approximately 7-8x, making the attack economics prohibitive and the incidents resolved (claim_findings[1]). There is no fraud, Ponzi mechanics, or exit scam in ETC's history (claim_findings[4]). Material caveats that justify a CAUTIONARY rating rather than a clean pass remain valid: the TVL is extremely minimal (~$74.6K, claim_findings[5]), governance contention around the Olympia upgrade is current and unresolved (claim_findings[6]), and no explicit SEC/CFTC classification exists. Two minor factual stale values — hashrate stated as '300+ TH/s' vs. current ~165-198 TH/s (claim_findings[2]) and TVL stated as '~$150K' vs. actual ~$74.6K (claim_findings[5]) — do not affect the band direction. A score of 58/CAUTIONARY correctly reflects a legitimate, long-running blockchain with structural caveats, without penalizing it for being the victim of attacks that have since been substantially defended against. The +16 delta moves the score from 42 to 58 as recommended by the reviewer.","score_delta":16,"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 c9554a52-e15c-4f7d-8e74-e6ff5095a090copy