Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"69cd18d6fc7a4248c829da7a484208a1","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-09-02T00:36:45.243Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"5b4fd7aa-6d72-461c-85a1-2f6ba4c78a25","new_score":0,"page_slug":"superior-browser-extension-campaign-wallet-drainer","prev_score":0,"reason":"Every core claim on this page checked out. All 15 fact-checked claims were rated confirmed or partially_supported by the reviewer, with 0% disputed, stale, or dead-link findings (summary.disputed_pct = 0.0). The central allegations — the 19-extension supply-chain campaign, the acquisition-vs-clean-build tactic, the malware's technical mechanics, and the named C2 infrastructure — are each independently corroborated by the Socket Security primary research post plus multiple independent secondary outlets (claim_findings[0], [4], [5], [7]). The only softness is in claim_findings[9], where a handful of the 14 'created clean' extension names could only be matched indirectly via C2 domain-naming patterns rather than a direct secondary-source confirmation of every single name — a completeness nuance, not an inaccuracy. The reviewer also flagged a high-priority coverage gap (no on-chain fund-flow tracing of drained wallets), but this is an opportunity for expansion rather than a defect in what the page currently asserts, consistent with the principle that open coverage gaps do not by themselves warrant denial or revision when nothing on the page is actually disputed.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}