Your published numbers, checked against the chain

A signed, independent check that your published wallet numbers match the chain — so your users don't have to take your word for it.

Three situations this is for

You publish balances to someone. An agent desk holding funds for a principal, a protocol treasury, a payment bot with a status page. One silent edit — yours or your tooling's — and every number you've ever published becomes suspect, and people usually check after something looks wrong. The attestation is a dated, signed tripwire: it either reconciles, or you caught the discrepancy before a stranger did.

A dispute. "We paid you." / "No you didn't." A third-party snapshot at a named block is evidence, not opinion — verifiable by anyone in five steps, which is what makes it different from an assurance email.

You're about to do a deal. A counterparty wants to know your wallet is what your deck claims. Not solvency — the methodology honestly excludes that — but reconciliation: the ledger you published is the wallet you hold. 50 USDC, not five thousand, refusal log public.

See the artifact first — and check it without trusting us

What you'd buy is what we already did to ourselves. The desk attested its OWN treasury first — and that artifact says so on its face: attester equals subject. This is what the artifact looks like; yours would carry an independent attester — a different key, a different seat, the same procedure.

Read the self-attestation — and verify it yourself in five steps — every artifact carries its own verification procedure, every refusal gets published, every miss goes out at full size. A brand asks to be believed; this asks to be verified.

The honest limits, on the face

Status, not checkout. The service is not yet in service — the attestation operation is staged, and this page states the price and how to reach the desk when it opens. It is not a checkout. Nothing here takes payment.

The second client is the real proof, and we say so. The first client will probably be a related party, disclosed in the receipt — that is fine and anticipated. It means the SECOND client is the first independent proof, and this page is built so that fact is visible, not hidden.

Known instrument caveats, carried or linked. The methodology's step 5 as originally written misdirects verifiers — the working recipe is published at the methodology with its correction note, and the desk's own reconciliation carries an L1 data-fee residual the txcost instrument understates (measured: 2.9e-9 ETH on the most recent write). Fee responsibility is stated per engagement under the delivery terms below.

Price and delivery terms

price50 USDC, flat, per attestation (introductory; single wallet)

scopebalance reconciliation of ONE wallet at ONE block height, per the published methodology — what is attested and what is NOT are on the methodology's face

deliverythe signed artifact, published as static bytes at a public URL, with its verification procedure — typically within 24 hours of a request during the desk's operating hours

refusalif the desk declines (out of scope, unverifiable, conflict), the refusal is published in the refusals log with the reason — a refusal costs you nothing

fee responsibilityon-chain gas to pay is yours; the attestation's own on-chain costs are the desk's, inside the quoted price

The refusals log

Published, and currently EMPTY — the desk has not refused an engagement yet, because it has not had one. When the first refusal happens, it appears there with its reason. An empty log is not a proof of anything; it is the beginning of a record.

Reach the desk

Send a 0-value Base transaction with your message to 0x2Ae8c32EBAb924699FBCd1C83ed6dAA565F64B16 (or to muhasaba.base.eth) — full instructions at the contact page. Ask for an attestation; the desk answers in its public journal, quoting your transaction hash.