Skip to main content
vet402
Independent MeasurementEndpoint record (L0 · L1)Published state: failLast probed: 2026-09-29 · today
vet402Back to the registerMethodology

api.socialfetch.dev/v1/linkedin/profiles

1.Catalog declaration

Catalog declaration for this endpoint
Resource URLhttps://api.socialfetch.dev/v1/linkedin/profiles
Sourcecdp_bazaar
Declared methodGET
Networkeip155:8453
Receiving address0x02c2fcafce36b4aadb39625866bc6b1699d83043
Declared price (base units)28000
Catalog statusactive
First seen / last seen2026-08-14 08:39 UTC / 2026-09-29 01:03 UTC
Catalog-reported calls / payers (30d)13 / 6

2.Probe history

2026-09-072026-09-29
Figure 1. Probe timeline, last 30 probes for this endpoint (UTC). Filled = pass, crossed = fail, dashed = unverified. Same-day probes overlap. Marks closer than one mark width are stepped down one lane.
L0 probe history, newest first
Probed atMethodVerdictHTTPLatencyReason
2026-09-29 04:40 UTCGETfail40279 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-28 13:40 UTCGETfail402586 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-27 16:40 UTCGETfail40276 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-27 04:40 UTCGETfail402102 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-26 13:40 UTCGETfail402167 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-25 16:40 UTCGETfail402156 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-24 22:40 UTCGETfail402128 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-24 04:40 UTCGETfail402125 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-23 13:40 UTCGETfail40287 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-22 16:40 UTCGETfail40280 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-21 22:40 UTCGETfail402185 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-21 04:40 UTCGETfail402180 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-20 13:40 UTCGETfail402121 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-19 16:40 UTCGETfail402155 msprice_mismatch
2026-09-19 04:40 UTCGETpass402282 ms—
2026-09-18 13:40 UTCGETpass402216 ms—
2026-09-17 16:40 UTCGETpass402131 ms—
2026-09-16 22:40 UTCGETpass402195 ms—
2026-09-16 13:40 UTCGETpass402530 ms—
2026-09-15 13:40 UTCGETpass402114 ms—
2026-09-14 22:40 UTCGETpass402218 ms—
2026-09-14 04:40 UTCGETpass402255 ms—
2026-09-13 16:40 UTCGETpass402170 ms—
2026-09-12 22:40 UTCGETpass402134 ms—
2026-09-12 13:40 UTCGETpass40269 ms—
2026-09-11 16:40 UTCGETpass402335 ms—
2026-09-11 04:40 UTCGETpass402118 ms—
2026-09-10 17:40 UTCGETpass402377 ms—
2026-09-10 05:40 UTCGETpass402655 ms—
2026-09-07 11:24 UTCGETpass40250 ms—

3.L1 — real purchases

0 of 2 paid attempts settled with a receipt, and 0 of those also returned a 2xx response (delivered). Each settled row carries its on-chain transaction hash — the receipt is the evidence. A settled row reads as nonce-bound when the on-chain re-read also matched the one-time signature nonce we generated for that purchase, and amount + payee when it matched amount, payee, asset and chain with no nonce on record — the binding shipped on 2026-09-04, so earlier rows carry the weaker evidence and keep their label rather than being demoted (methodology). settled is the transfer we confirmed on-chain; delivered is the response arriving. A settled row whose paid request answered 5xx counts as settled and not as delivered — definitions.

2 of those paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against this seller (0 settled and answered 4xx, 2 answered 4xx with no settlement receipt, 0 answered 402 or 5xx while our own payer wallet was out of USDC, 2026-09-13 00:00 to 2026-09-15 23:49 UTC). A 4xx says the request was not one the server would accept, and we cannot rule out that the request was ours to get wrong: vet402 buys with no API key of the seller's, and sends a POST body only when the seller declares one. This is the same principle the methodology already applied to path_template URLs, applied to the body and the authentication header as well. The rows are not deleted and not hidden — they are below, with their status and HTTP code, and they are out of the denominator for delivered (corrections).

Terms in this table

settle_failed
vet402 signed a payment and got no settlement receipt back.
unsettled_4xx
held_reason in the export: the paid request got a 4xx with no settlement receipt and no transaction.
L2 not_checked
not checked: the paid request did not answer 200, so there was no response to check against the listing's output schema.
Whose side
the same words as the seller page: seller's side only after failures on two different days (UTC), marked “under re-check”; vet402's side; or not sorted (the rules).
0/2
Figure 2. Settle-through: one cell per paid attempt. Filled = settled with an on-chain receipt, crossed = paid but no receipt.
L1 purchase history, newest first
Attempted atResultHTTPReceipt (tx)Latency
09-16 18:01settle_failed400—544 ms
28000 units (≈ $0.03 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted: no charge
09-10 07:00settle_failed400—345 ms
28000 units (≈ $0.03 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted: no charge

Get one email when this record's verdict changes. No digest, no marketing — one message per change, and only for this endpoint. We first send one confirmation email; nothing else goes out until you confirm.

4.Catalog listing events

Catalog listing events, newest first
Detected onEventBeforeAfter
2026-08-31relisted{"status":"delisted"}{"status":"active"}
2026-08-30delisted{"status":"active"}{"status":"delisted"}

unverified is not a failure; a fail is published only after two consecutive failing probes. Definitions: methodology.

5.Dispute this record

Think a measurement above is wrong? Say which probe or purchase and what you observed instead. One person reads it and replies. The record is never deleted on dispute: if it was wrong, the correction is published with the same weight; if it was right, it stands. Operators who control the receiving address can also sign a dispute via POST /api/v1/observatory/disputes (API reference), which re-measures through the normal publication gate.

About the purchase at 2026-09-10T07:00:06Z (UTC). The form starts with that time; add what you saw instead.