An anti-scam site whose own claims don't hold up is worse than one that stays quiet. So we think it's worth laying out, in the open, where our information comes from, how we check it, and when we'd rather not write something at all. You don't have to take us on faith—but after reading this page, you should be able to judge for yourself whether our content is worth trusting.
Where our information comes from
ScamLens content draws mainly on three kinds of sources, roughly in this order of priority:
- Official exchange announcements and help centers. When something concerns a specific platform's rules, official domains, or security features (withdrawal whitelists, 2FA, and the like), we go by the platform's own documentation—not by hearsay.
- Public anti-fraud and law-enforcement education. Scam-tactic explainers published by anti-fraud agencies, regulators, and security communities are an important reference for understanding how the playbooks evolve.
- Hands-on observations we can reproduce. Some warning signs we can verify by walking through the flow ourselves—what a given action actually looks like in the official interface, whether a particular prompt really exists. When we can confirm something firsthand, we try to.
How we check a single claim
Before anything goes into an article, we hold ourselves to a few rules:
Cross-check against official sources
For any claim that touches a specific platform, we go back to that platform's official announcements or help center to confirm it, rather than quoting a secondhand retelling. When sources disagree, the official wording wins.
Only conclude what we can verify
For "what happens when you do X" or "what does signal Y look like" type claims, we lean toward writing it only after we can reproduce and confirm it ourselves. A bogus "how to spot it" tip is more dangerous than no tip at all.
If we're unsure, we leave it out or flag it
If we can't reliably verify a claim, we either don't write it, or we say plainly in the text that this is "a common belief / not settled." We don't dress up a guess as a fact.
Why we rarely cite hard statistics
You may have noticed that our articles almost never include numbers like "this scam stole $X billion last year" or "X% of newcomers get caught." That's deliberate.
Numbers look authoritative—and that's exactly the trap
Statistics in crypto fraud are mostly hard to verify independently: definitions differ, sources copy from one another, and figures go stale fast. A precise number you can't verify looks authoritative but is really just secondhand rumor with a decimal point. We'd rather tell you qualitatively—"this kind of scam is common, does serious damage, and specifically targets newcomers"—than quote a precise figure we can't stand behind just to sound impressive.
Put another way: the honest move is to admit "we can't be sure about some numbers," not to grab one that looks professional and run with it.
How we update content
Scam tactics aren't frozen in place—domain sleight of hand, scripts, and technical details all keep shifting. Here's how we handle that:
- Every article carries the month it was last reviewed, so you can tell at a glance how current the information is.
- When a tactic changes, or we find something inaccurate in the original, we come back and fix it.
- Whenever a change is substantive (not a typo or a layout tweak), it goes into the public corrections log, with what changed and why. We don't quietly edit content and pretend nothing happened.
Found an error? Here's how to tell us
We're not infallible. If you spot a factual error, outdated information, or a more accurate official statement in any article, we'd genuinely welcome an email: privacy@scamlenss.com. If you can include the official source you saw, we can verify it faster.
For substantive errors we confirm, we'll fix them and log them in the corrections log. That's not a nuisance to us—it's a chance to make the site more trustworthy.
Our principle in one line
Write only what we can verify; when we can't, leave it out. When a number is uncertain, say so plainly. When we change something, log it in the open. An anti-scam site's credibility doesn't come from volume—it lives in these unglamorous habits.
To learn more about who we are and how the lights stay on, see about us and our affiliate disclosure.