Dispute a verdict with evidence, not a thumbs-down.

EDGE: READY

More options

What are you checking?

EXAMPLE Checked static example Cache n/a NOT LIVE

8.8.8.8

EXAMPLERUN A LIVE CHECK

ASN

AS15169 · Google LLCgoogle.com

ASN TRAFFIC

Source ↗ Loads Cloudflare content & usage metrics.

Last 7 days · HTML requests · ASN-wide, not this IP's human probability.

Chart by Cloudflare Radar · CC BY 4.0 · Native percentages, when shown: Cloudflare Radar HTTP summary data · CC BY-NC 4.0, non-commercial use on this free tool · ASN-wide, not this IP

Blank or blocked? Reload or use Source above. Chart availability does not change the IP verdict.

LOCATION

US · California, Mountain View

IPBot

🇺🇸 US · California, Mountain View

IPinfo

🇺🇸 US · AS15169

GeoLite2

🇺🇸 US

DB-IP

🇺🇸 US · California, Mountain View

Bright Data

🇺🇸 US · California, Mountain View

ROUTE

ANNOUNCED 8.8.8.0/24

IP TYPE

PUBLIC INTERNET INFRASTRUCTURE

Not assessedIPJURY SCOREEXPERIMENTAL · NOT A PROBABILITY EXAMPLE

Run a live check for an evidence verdict and experimental interpretation.

Why this result · full calculation

Run a live check. The example is not scored.

Evidence confidence is not prediction accuracy. A provisional range spans policy outcomes for unanswered questions; it is not a probability interval.

A source names this exact address in a record against it.

Adverse context was observed; no covered record names this exact IP.

Sources disagree. Review the conflicting location or routing records.

Some evidence is unavailable. LIMITED describes coverage, not an adverse finding.

No source covered here reports anything against this address.

Platforms also weigh account, device, payment and behaviour signals no IP check can see.

is not a public internet address, so no external IP evidence check is made.

This address is in Shared Address Space (100.64.0.0/10), used inside provider networks. It is not a public exit address. This lookup cannot establish how many subscribers share your public connection; no external source was queried.

It is a hosting address, which many platforms treat with more friction than a home connection — that is a role, not a finding.

Sources identify a mobile network role. That alone does not establish whether this exit is shared.

Sources identify a residential network role, not an exclusive household connection.

It answers public infrastructure queries, which is a role rather than a finding.

It is a Tor exit, which is a network role and not an abuse record.

It carries privacy-relay evidence, which is a network role and not an abuse record.

Enter one IPv4 or IPv6 address to convene the jury.

That is not an IPv4 or IPv6 address. Try 8.8.8.8 or 2606:4700:4700::1111.

This connection has made too many lookups and the counter clears shortly.

The lookup counter has cleared. Run the check again.

This deployment has no active source licence profile, so no evidence may be shown. Retrying will not change that.

The request never reached IPJury. Check the connection and run it again.

The sources did not answer in time, so no verdict was reached. Nothing is concluded about this address either way.

OPEN FULL EVIDENCE REPORT

JURY READY

Enter an address, or check your own connection · the example below is replaced in place

FULL REPORT IDENTITY · SOURCE MATRIX · SIX-AXIS VERDICT · EVIDENCE RECORD

EVIDENCE SNAPSHOTSEPARATE AXES · NOT A SCORE

ANONYMITY: No direct anonymity evidence observed
ABUSE EVIDENCE: No abuse evidence in covered sources
COVERAGE: 6/7 jurors responded

IDENTITY

COORDINATES: not loaded in static example
ROUTING: ROUTE ORIGIN OBSERVED
PREFIX: 8.8.8.0/24
TIMEZONE: America/Los_Angeles
REVERSE DNS: not loaded in static example
STACK: IPv4
RANGE: 8.8.8.0 – 8.8.8.255
REGISTRY: not loaded in static example

SOURCE MATRIX

4 location sources agree at country level · — not covered · W/H withheld

SIGNAL	IPBot	IPinfo	GeoLite2	DB-IP	IPtoASN
COUNTRY	US	US	US	US	—
CITY	California, Mountain View	—	—	California, Mountain View	—
ASN	AS15169	AS15169	AS15169	—	AS15169
PROXY	NO	—	—	—	—
VPN	W/H	—	—	—	—
TOR	NO	—	—	—	—
HOSTING	NO	—	—	—	—
ABUSE	NO	—	—	—	—

SIX-AXIS VERDICT

NETWORK ROLEHIGH

Public internet infrastructure

Service role · anycast context · operator identity

ANONYMITYMEDIUM

No direct anonymity evidence observed

No proxy, VPN, or Tor finding in covered fields

ABUSE EVIDENCEMEDIUM

No abuse evidence in covered sources

This means “not observed,” never “clean”

GEO CONTEXTLOW

US · single geolocation estimate

Country-level context; physical location not proven

ROUTINGHIGH

Route origin observed · RPKI state withheld by licence

Origin ASN · announced prefix · route-origin conflict

COVERAGEMEDIUM

6/7 jurors responded

Named jurors · lineage families · abstentions visible

EVIDENCE RECORD

JUROR	AXIS	CLAIM	CONF.	STATUS
Network identityIPBot network	network role	AS15169 · Google LLC	HIGH	RESPONDED
Operator and role profileIPBot classification	network role	public infrastructure	HIGH	RESPONDED
Anonymity signalsIPBot classification	anonymity	no direct proxy/VPN/Tor evidence	MEDIUM	RESPONDED
Direct threat evidenceIPBot evidence	abuse	no direct record in covered evidence	MEDIUM	RESPONDED

{
  "example": true,
  "message": "Run a live check to load the evidence contract."
}

SUBMIT A CORRECTION

A correction is an evidence review, not a popularity vote. Include the exact claim you dispute and a public source that supports the correction.

Review policy

Exact-IP evidence is reviewed separately from prefix or ASN context.
Operator documentation and routing evidence outrank screenshots of unexplained scores.
Corrections never erase a legitimate dissenting source; they change interpretation or data only when supported.
Accepted changes are intended to be documented in the public correction history.

A NUMBER NEEDS ITS EVIDENCE

IPJury keeps network type, anonymity, abuse, location, routing and coverage separate. Its optional experimental index explains a published policy over those facts; it never replaces the named evidence verdict or conceals missing information.

MYSTERY SCORE MODEL

83/100

What does 83 measure? Who supplied it? Is hosting being treated as abuse? Did one heuristic outweigh a direct record? A number cannot tell you that two of its sources flatly contradicted each other.

Cross-axis averaging
Hidden source lineage
Missing source treated as “false”
Disagreement averaged away
Platform outcome implied

EVIDENCE + EXPLAINED INTERPRETATION

BANDDISPUTED RULEsource-conflict ROLEhosting ANONYMITYno direct evidence ABUSEno record observed GEOcountry disputed ROUTINGorigin observed COVERAGE6/7 responded

One rule read one axis and named the state. The axes it did not read stay beside it. “Disputed” and “too little coverage to say” are answers a single number cannot express.

THE FIVE RULES OF EVIDENCE

[ READ FULL METHOD ]

01
Vote only on the same axis
A proxy flag, an abuse report, a hosting role, and a city estimate are not interchangeable votes.
02
Direct evidence outranks a prior
An exact-IP record is different from an inference based on the ASN, prefix, or network category.
03
Deduplicate source lineage
Three websites backed by one upstream database do not become three independent evidence families.
04
Let jurors abstain
Timeout, no IPv6 coverage, disabled license, or missing record is shown—not silently converted to “no.”
05
Explain dissent
CGNAT, anycast, reassignment, data age, and route context can all produce legitimate disagreement.

FOLLOW THE IP QUESTION

Each route opens in the same tool surface, preserving the active evidence session.

01The jury method: same-axis votes, source lineage, abstention, and dissent.THE JURY METHOD 02Every juror is named. Every limitation is visible.THE SOURCE REGISTER 03Diagnose the listing before you request removal.READ THE LISTING BEFORE YOU APPEAL IT 04Terms: evidence context, not a guarantee of platform outcomes.TERMS OF USE

QUESTIONS THE SCORE CANNOT ANSWER

How do I dispute a classification I believe is wrong?

Submit the exact claim you dispute along with a public source that supports the correction. A correction is an evidence review, not a vote, so the source matters more than the objection.

What kind of evidence makes a correction likely to be accepted?

Operator documentation, registry records and routing evidence. A screenshot of an unexplained score from another tool does not establish anything reviewable.

Will an accepted correction delete a source that disagreed?

No. Corrections change data or interpretation when the evidence supports it, and a legitimate dissenting source stays visible in the record.

What happens after I submit a correction?

If the review queue is configured, the submission is stored for manual review; otherwise the interface prepares an email for you to send. Accepted changes are intended to be documented in a public correction history.

Dispute a verdict with evidence, not a thumbs-down.

WHAT THIS REPORTS

PRIVACY

8.8.8.8

HOW THE BAND IS DECIDED

JURY READY

IDENTITY

REGISTRATION VERSUS LOCATION

SOURCE MATRIX

READING THE MATRIX

SIX-AXIS VERDICT

SIX AXES

EVIDENCE RECORD

AN OBSERVATION WINDOW, NOT A HISTORY OF THE ADDRESS

SUBMIT A CORRECTION

Review policy

A NUMBER NEEDS ITS EVIDENCE

THE FIVE RULES OF EVIDENCE

Vote only on the same axis

Direct evidence outranks a prior

Deduplicate source lineage

Let jurors abstain

Explain dissent

FOLLOW THE IP QUESTION

QUESTIONS THE SCORE CANNOT ANSWER

Methodology