Skip to main content
Independent MeasurementEndpoint record (L0 · L1)Published state: passLast probed: 2026-09-28 · 1 day ago

api.insumermodel.com/v1/trust/batch

1.Catalog declaration

Catalog declaration for this endpoint
Resource URLhttps://api.insumermodel.com/v1/trust/batch
Sourcecdp_bazaar
Declared methodPOST
Networkeip155:8453
Receiving address0xad982cb19acca2923df8f687c0614a7700255a23
Declared price (base units)150000
Catalog statusactive
First seen / last seen2026-08-14 08:39 UTC / 2026-09-29 01:02 UTC
Catalog-reported calls / payers (30d)5 / 2

2.Probe history

2026-08-152026-09-28
Figure 1. Probe timeline, last 29 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
2026-09-28 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402482 ms—
2026-09-27 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402477 ms—
2026-09-27 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402515 ms—
2026-09-26 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402369 ms—
2026-09-25 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402470 ms—
2026-09-25 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402409 ms—
2026-09-24 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402258 ms—
2026-09-23 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402283 ms—
2026-09-22 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402442 ms—
2026-09-22 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402301 ms—
2026-09-21 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402328 ms—
2026-09-20 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402216 ms—
2026-09-19 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402490 ms—
2026-09-19 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402189 ms—
2026-09-18 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402395 ms—
2026-09-17 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402358 ms—
2026-09-17 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402179 ms—
2026-09-16 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402470 ms—
2026-09-15 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402231 ms—
2026-09-14 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402287 ms—
2026-09-14 13:40 UTCPOSTpass4021374 ms—
2026-09-13 16:40 UTCPOSTpass402106 ms—
2026-09-13 04:40 UTCPOSTpass402391 ms—
2026-09-12 13:40 UTCPOSTpass4022186 ms—
2026-09-11 22:40 UTCPOSTpass402372 ms—
2026-09-11 13:40 UTCPOSTpass402448 ms—
2026-09-10 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402159 ms—
2026-09-06 11:24 UTCPOSTpass402142 ms—
2026-08-15 10:42 UTCPOSTpass40271 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.

1 of those paid attempts are held as inconclusive rather than counted against this seller (0 settled and answered 4xx, 0 answered 4xx with no settlement receipt, 1 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).

1 of the paid attempts failed on vet402's side (for example our wallet was out of USDC, or we did not send the input the listing declares). The rows stay in the table.

Terms in this table

settle_failed
vet402 signed a payment and got no settlement receipt back.
payer_unfunded
held_reason in the export: a 402 or 5xx while vet402's Base wallet was out of USDC (2026-09-13 to 2026-09-15).
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
09-14 06:01settle_failed402—1045 ms
150000 units (≈ $0.15 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: vet402's side
08-15 12:48settle_failed402—219 ms
150000 units (≈ $0.15 USDC) · L2 not_checkedWhose side: not sorted: vet402 unproven

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
2026-09-04relisted{"status":"delisted"}{"status":"active"}
2026-08-31delisted{"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 2026-09-14T06:01:05Z (UTC). The form starts with that time; add what you saw instead.