Loading ForensicBlock
Preparing your blockchain forensics platform...
Preparing your blockchain forensics platform...
Blockchain evidence, handled with eDiscovery discipline — collected, preserved, authenticated, and produced to the standard a courtroom demands.
Blockchain transaction records are electronically stored information. When a matter involves digital assets, those records enter discovery like any other electronic record — except they don't live in a custodian's mailbox, they live on public networks, and pulling a screenshot off a block explorer is not preservation. They have to be collected forensically, preserved under a chain of custody, authenticated, and produced in a form a reviewing party can trust. That is the discipline eDiscovery teams already run — applied to a substrate most vendors treat as a screenshot.
A block-explorer capture has no custody story. A ForensicBlock record is SHA-256 sealed at generation, with a hash-chained audit log behind it.
Attribution ships with named sources and explicit confidence, behind a public, versioned methodology anyone can read — so the production can be examined on its merits.
Deliverables are standard, portable files — sealed PDF exhibits, JSON evidence bundles, hash manifests — that drop into whatever review workflow your team already runs.
Every stage of the lifecycle you run on documents, mapped to what the platform actually performs on chain — each stage links to the real surface behind the claim.
Subject addresses are screened against live-first sanctions data with disclosed source and freshness, and multi-hop fund-flow tracing across 7 live chains identifies the wallets, counterparties, and records-holding institutions a matter touches.
See chain coverageEvery report is SHA-256 sealed with a hash-chained custody log; the audit lineage is independently timestamped (RFC 3161) and anchored to Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps, and any reviewer can verify the seal from a browser — no account.
Verify a sealed reportCollection runs through a deterministic engine — the same input on the same methodology version yields the same output — and every sealed report cites its methodology version (v1.7.6 today) and SHA-256 content hash, so processing is reproducible, not asserted.
Read the methodologyNumbered findings, transaction graphs, and entity attribution with named sources and explicit confidence — reviewed under an examiner-of-record workflow with recorded lifecycle states, and limitations stated in plain text where tracing pauses.
See the review postureA sealed report exports as a production ZIP in one click: the sealed PDF exhibit, hash manifests (CSV + JSON) of the anchored evidence SHA-256s with the public verify URL, a conventional Concordance-style load file (þ-delimited — a standard format review platforms ingest; we do not claim integrations with any review platform), and a verification README — packaged for FRE 902(13)/(14) self-authentication. Authentication, not admissibility; the trial court decides the rest.
Read the FRE 902 explainerEvery sealed production carries a public verifier URL. Anyone can verify the seal in a browser — counsel, regulators, clients, or auditors — no account required. The verification story travels with the exhibit, not with us.
Open the public verifierWe do not claim integrations with any review platform. What we produce is better than a connector: standard, portable, self-verifying files that drop into the workflow your team already runs — and that any reviewing party can check without trusting us.
FRE 902(13) self-authenticates records generated by an electronic process; FRE 902(14) covers data copied from an electronic device. Both require a qualified person's certification — which is exactly what the examiner-of-record block carries.
We package for 902(13)/(14) authentication. That is authentication, not admissibility — hearsay, relevance, and Daubert qualification remain separate hurdles your counsel argues independently. We never claim a production is automatically admitted.
Read the FRE 902 explainerScope, stated plainly:
ForensicBlock handles the on-chain evidence in a matter — we are not a document-review platform and we do not process your custodian email, chat, or file collections. We do not claim integrations with any review platform; deliverables are standard files your existing workflow ingests directly. We are not a law firm and provide no legal advice; discovery strategy, privilege calls, and production decisions remain your counsel's. Where tracing pauses — mixer ingress, privacy coins, gap windows — the record says so in plain text.
Send one real address from a real matter — we trace it and return a sealed, court-ready packet for free. Engagements are scoped per matter on a Statement of Work, the same engagement rhythm as the rest of your discovery vendors — no per-seat platform contract.
Free preliminary trace, then scoped per matter on a Statement of Work — a fraction of the per-seat annual contract enterprise incumbents charge. Engagement fee set in conversation.
Free preliminary trace · scoped per matter after · per-seat annual contract