Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← SuperRarereviewed 2026-10-15 · 29 claims checked

Fact-check findings

What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read SuperRare against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.

Read this first

These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.

“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.

Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.

disputed 3unverifiable 3stale 1link rot 4confirmed 188 corrections pending · 0 applied

disputed

3 claims

The reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.

  1. #5[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Platform Overview and Background
    “Total historical trading volume on the platform has been estimated at approximately $210 million.”
    reviewerTotal historical trading volume on SuperRare has been approximately $210 million.The cited cryptoslam.io page could not be accessed to confirm it supports $210M, but two independent, credible trackers (Nonfungible.com, CoinGecko) put lifetime SuperRare volume above $300M, materially higher than the page's figure. Same figure repeated in sections[5].
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    Total historical trading volume on the platform has been estimated at more than $300 million.
    citedwww.cryptoslam.io/superrare/sales/summary
  2. #6[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Market Position and Platform Viability
    “SuperRare occupies a premium niche in the NFT art market, targeting high-net-worth collectors with an average NFT sale price reported at approximately $7,940 and an estimated total lifetime trading volume of approximately $210 million.”
    reviewerSuperRare's average NFT sale price is approximately $7,940.Average sale price figure is reasonably corroborated; the $210 million lifetime volume figure in this same sentence is the disputed element (same defect as sections[0]).
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    SuperRare occupies a premium niche in the NFT art market, targeting high-net-worth collectors with an average NFT sale price reported at approximately $7,940 and an estimated total lifetime trading volume of more than $300 million.
    citedwww.cryptoslam.io/superrare/sales/summary
  3. #15[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Incident Response and User Compensation
    “Following this announcement, the RARE token price surged approximately 41% in a 24-hour period, and derivatives trading volume reportedly doubled, indicating restored market confidence.”
    reviewerFollowing the reimbursement announcement, the RARE token price surged approximately 41% in a 24-hour period.The only locatable copy of the cited source reports a 35% price move and a ~20x volume increase, not 41% and 'doubled.' Same error repeated in summary and timeline[10].
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    Following this announcement, the RARE token price surged approximately 35% in a 24-hour period, and derivatives trading volume reportedly rose nearly 20-fold, indicating restored market confidence.
    cited99bitcoins.com/news/altcoins/rare-crypto…ngly-after-hack/

unverifiable

3 claims

No source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.

  1. #21[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “No SEC or CFTC regulatory actions specifically targeting SuperRare or the RARE token have been identified in public records.”
    reviewerNo SEC or CFTC regulatory actions specifically targeting SuperRare or RARE have been identified in public records.This is an absence claim (no enforcement actions found); not practical to definitively prove a negative via search, though no contradicting enforcement action was found in this review either.
  2. #27[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “By the end of 2022, the token had declined approximately 89% from its peak.”
    reviewerBy the end of 2022, RARE had declined approximately 89% from its peak.Plausible given the token's known trajectory from a $3.79 ATH, but could not independently confirm the precise 89% figure from an accessible historical price source.
    citedcoinmarketcap.com/currencies/superrare/historical-data/
  3. #28[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Market Position and Platform Viability
    “The transition to the Rare Protocol in 2023 further decentralized curatorial authority to RARE token holders.”
    reviewerSuperRare launched the Rare Protocol in 2023, further decentralizing curatorial authority.A GitHub repository for 'rareprotocol/core' exists, consistent with a Rare Protocol project, but this review could not independently date its 2023 launch or its decentralization scope from a primary announcement.

stale

1 claim

The claim was accurate when written but events since have overtaken it.

  1. #29[stale][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
    “RARE token hits an all-time low of approximately $0.1365, reflecting the broader crypto and NFT market downturn.”
    reviewerRARE token hits an all-time low of approximately $0.1365 on May 12, 2022.This was accurate at the time but has since been superseded; the July 2025 exploit and broader market conditions pushed RARE to a new, lower all-time low in October 2025.
    Proposed correction (not yet applied)
    RARE token falls to approximately $0.1365, a multi-year low at the time; the token later fell further, setting a new all-time low of approximately $0.0099 around October 10, 2025.

confirmed

18 claims

The cited evidence supports the claim as written.

  1. #1[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Overview and Background
    “The platform was co-founded in 2018 by CEO John Crain, CTO Charles Crain, and Jonathan Perkins. The team began development in late 2017, initially bootstrapped without external investment before launching publicly.”
    reviewerSuperRare was co-founded in 2018 by John Crain, Charles Crain, and Jonathan Perkins, with development beginning in late 2017 without external investment.Multiple independent sources corroborate founders, roles, and the 2017 build / 2018 launch split.
    citednews.artnet.com/market/superrare-founders-2086177
  2. #2[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Overview and Background
    “The platform charges a 15% primary sale fee to artists and a 3% buyer fee on purchases; secondary sales yield a 10% royalty to the original artist.”
    reviewerSuperRare charges a 15% primary sale fee to artists, a 3% buyer fee, and a 10% secondary royalty.Fee structure matches the cited source exactly.
    citedwww.gemini.com/cryptopedia/superrare-nft…rypto-art-market
  3. #3[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Overview and Background
    “In March 2021, SuperRare raised $9 million in a Series A round led by Velvet Sea Ventures and 1confirmation, with participation from Collaborative Fund, Samsung Next, BlockTower Capital, Ashton Kutcher, Mark Cuban, Chamath Palihapitiya, and Marc Benioff.”
    reviewerIn March 2021, SuperRare raised $9 million in a Series A led by Velvet Sea Ventures and 1confirmation, with the listed participants.Round size, date, leads and most named participants corroborated by The Block and TechCrunch; BlockTower Capital was not independently re-confirmed in the two outlets checked but is not contradicted.
    citedwww.samsungnext.com/blog/why-we-invested…-art-marketplace
  4. #4[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Overview and Background
    “The platform transitioned toward decentralization in August 2021 with the introduction of the RARE governance token and the SuperRare DAO, which oversees platform parameters, allocates community treasury funds, and controls curatorial policies.”
    reviewerSuperRare introduced the RARE governance token and SuperRare DAO in August 2021.Consistent with SuperRare's own announcement and documentation.
    citedmedium.com/superrare/announcing-the-rare…work-390ff60b50a
  5. #7[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “On July 28, 2025, SuperRare's RareStakingV1 staking contract (deployed at 0xfFB512B9176D527C5D32189c3e310Ed4aB2Bb9eC on Ethereum) was exploited through a critical broken access control vulnerability.”
    reviewerOn July 28, 2025, SuperRare's RareStakingV1 staking contract at 0xfFB512B9176D527C5D32189c3e310Ed4aB2Bb9eC was exploited via a broken access control bug in updateMerkleRoot().Address and date independently verified on Etherscan and via SolidityScan's writeup.
    citedblog.solidityscan.com/superrare-hack-ana…is-488d544d89e0/
  6. #8[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “specifically 'require((msg.sender != owner() || msg.sender != address(0xc2F394a45e994bc81EfF678bDE9172e10f7c8ddc)))' — which paradoxically allowed any caller to pass the check since no address can simultaneously equal both the owner and the authorized address”
    reviewerThe vulnerable require statement used NOT-EQUAL operators combined with OR logic, specifically the quoted code, which paradoxically allowed any caller through.Code snippet matches the cited source verbatim (aside from an extra set of parentheses, immaterial to the logic).
    citedblog.solidityscan.com/superrare-hack-ana…is-488d544d89e0/
  7. #9[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “The attacker (address: 0x5B9B4B4DaFbCfCEEa7aFbA56958fcBB37d82D4a2) exploited this flaw in three steps: computing a malicious Merkle root, submitting it through the unprotected function, and using the fraudulent root to claim approximately 11,907,874 RARE tokens. The exploit transaction hash was 0xd813751bfb98a51912b8394b5856ae4515be6a9c6e5583e06b41d9255ba6e3c1.”
    reviewerThe attacker's wallet (0x5B9B4B4DaFbCfCEEa7aFbA56958fcBB37d82D4a2) claimed approximately 11,907,874 RARE tokens via transaction 0xd813751bfb98a51912b8394b5856ae4515be6a9c6e5583e06b41d9255ba6e3c1.Address, transaction hash, and token amount match an independent security-firm writeup exactly.
    citedblog.verichains.io/p/superrare-exploit-analysis
  8. #10[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “A notable complication arose when a frontrunner observed the attacker's pending transaction in the mempool and submitted a competing transaction with higher gas fees one block after the original attacker's contract deployment, ultimately claiming the stolen tokens first.”
    reviewerA frontrunner observed the pending exploit transaction and submitted a competing transaction with higher gas fees one block later, claiming the tokens first.Frontrunning mechanic independently corroborated.
    citedwww.thecoinrepublic.com/2025/07/28/super…-frontrun-twist/
  9. #11[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “The attacker's wallet had been funded via Tornado Cash approximately 186 days before the exploit, indicating premeditated planning and deliberate obfuscation of the funding source.”
    reviewerThe attacker's wallet had been funded via Tornado Cash approximately 186 days before the exploit.186-day figure matches contemporaneous on-chain monitoring reports.
    citedwww.cryptopolitan.com/superrare-nft-expl…ted-rare-tokens/
  10. #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “The RARE token price dropped approximately 12% immediately following public disclosure of the exploit. On-chain data confirmed the stolen tokens remained in the attacker's address without being swapped or laundered in the period immediately following the incident. SuperRare clarified that the exploit was isolated to one staking vault and that NFTs on the platform, as well as the main trading and auction infrastructure, were unaffected.”
    reviewerThe RARE token price dropped approximately 12% immediately following disclosure, and the exploit was isolated to one staking vault with NFTs and trading infrastructure unaffected.12% drop and scope-limitation claims corroborated by multiple contemporaneous reports.
    citedwww.ainvest.com/news/superrare-nft-platf…en-dips-12-2507/
  11. #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: July 2025 Smart Contract Exploit ($731K)
    “The vulnerability is classified under OWASP SC01:2025 Access Control Vulnerabilities.”
    reviewerThe vulnerability is classified under OWASP SC01:2025 Access Control Vulnerabilities.Direct match to the cited source's own classification.
    citedblog.solidityscan.com/superrare-hack-ana…is-488d544d89e0/
  12. #14[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Incident Response and User Compensation
    “By August 5, 2025 — approximately one week after the incident — SuperRare announced it had fully reimbursed the 61 affected wallets and implemented stricter audit protocols, specifically mandating re-audits for all post-audit code modifications.”
    reviewerBy August 5, 2025, SuperRare announced full reimbursement of the 61 affected wallets and mandated re-audits for all post-audit code modifications.Wallet count, reimbursement, and re-audit policy are corroborated.
    cited99bitcoins.com/news/altcoins/rare-crypto…ngly-after-hack/
  13. #16[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “The SuperRare DAO Community Treasury is controlled via a 4-of-7 multi-sig wallet managed by a 7-person governance council comprising 1 SuperRare Labs team member, 2 SuperRare Labs investors, and 3 independent community members.”
    reviewerRARE token holders govern curatorial requirements, independent artist admissions, grant programs, and treasury allocation; the treasury is controlled by a 4-of-7 multi-sig managed by a 7-person council (1 Labs team member, 2 Labs investors, 3 independent community members).A separate page on SuperRare's own docs site (Actors/Stakeholders) describes a 5-of-7 arrangement, an internal inconsistency in SuperRare's own documentation, but the page's 4-of-7 figure matches the DAO's primary governance page.
    citeddocs.superrare.com/whitepapers/master/the-rare-token
  14. #17[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “SuperRare's documentation explicitly characterizes RARE as a 'curation and governance token' and states it 'is not an investment product.'”
    reviewerSuperRare's documentation characterizes RARE as a 'curation and governance token' that 'is not an investment product.'Exact quote match found on SuperRare's own help center.
    citeddocs.superrare.com/whitepapers/master/the-rare-token
  15. #18[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “The token has a total supply of 1 billion RARE, with approximately 820.51 million tokens in circulation as of 2025.”
    reviewerRARE has a total supply of 1 billion tokens, with approximately 820.51 million in circulation as of 2025.Total supply confirmed exactly; circulating figure is close to current data with normal drift expected over roughly a year.
    citedcoinmarketcap.com/currencies/superrare/
  16. #19[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “The RARE token reached an all-time high of approximately $3.79 on October 11, 2021, coinciding with the broader NFT market peak.”
    reviewerRARE reached an all-time high of approximately $3.79 on October 11, 2021.Exact match.
    citedcoinmarketcap.com/currencies/superrare/
  17. #20[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RARE Token and Governance Structure
    “The token's market capitalization as of mid-2025 stood at approximately $12.7 million.”
    reviewerRARE's market capitalization as of mid-2025 was approximately $12.7 million.Plausible and directionally consistent with current data; could not find a point-in-time snapshot from mid-2025 to confirm exactly.
    citedcoinmarketcap.com/currencies/superrare/
  18. #22[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Security Practices and Smart Contract Risk Assessment
    “Security researchers from SolidityScan, Resonance Security, and Blockaid independently analyzed the vulnerability and classified it as a broken access control issue — one of the most fundamental and preventable categories of smart contract vulnerabilities under the OWASP Smart Contract Top 10.”
    reviewerSolidityScan, Resonance Security, and Blockaid independently analyzed the vulnerability and classified it as broken access control; the flaw was detectable through standard static analysis.SolidityScan and Blockaid independently confirmed as cited; Resonance Security's specific analysis could not be directly verified because its cited URL is now dead (see link_rot finding), though the firm's involvement is plausible given the page title recorded in sources_used.
    citedblog.solidityscan.com/superrare-hack-ana…is-488d544d89e0/www.resonance.security/blog-posts/superr…est-wake-up-call
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.