risk data for machine payments
Wallet
?
0xe691de013804fa36e90f1582d7e00c601fa3dffc
Base · role: pays and receives · not enough data
Buyer-side scoring — something no other public x402 service offers. It answers the seller's question: should I serve this agent, and how large a channel should I open for it?
PAYS_AND_RECEIVES
Payments sent
1
1 recipients
Spent
$109
Payments received
2
1 payers
Received
$4.75
First seen
5d ago
This address both pays and receives. On its own that proves
nothing — an operator may pay for other APIs and sell its own. But combined with heavy concentration
on a single counterparty it starts to look like volume inflation, and we flag it.
A score needs more than a single payment to mean anything.
Pays to
| Recipient | Payments | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| 0x785fcdca…1465 | 1 | $109 |
Recent activity
| When | Direction | Counterparty | Amount | Facilitator | Transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3d ago | in | 0x13de1e11…883e | $2.75 | not in registry | 0xb62e…9345 |
| 3d ago | in | 0x13de1e11…883e | $2 | not in registry | 0x7d28…5d3f |
| 5d ago | out | 0x785fcdca…1465 | $109 | not in registry | 0x7f6f…8b4d |
Reference
| Address | 0xe691de013804fa36e90f1582d7e00c601fa3dffc |
| Network | Base eip155:8453 |
| Sanctions screening | clear |
| Machine access | /v1/wallet · /full · external explorer |
Next
Market overview →
Payments, median ticket, who pays whom, who settles.
Endpoints →
Scores, findings and the full observation history per resource.
Facilitators →
Who actually settles — including those in no public registry.
API →
Verdict before payment, seller and wallet scores, market aggregates.
We hold no fundsNo custody, no escrow, no facilitator role. Not one payment passes through us.
Same input, same answerScoring is deterministic. No model, no learning on the fly.
Objections welcomeWe show owners what drags a score down. How to dispute
We say what we can't seeSome payments move off-chain, and we say so instead of pretending otherwise.