Essential: this archive describes structure only. Custody model first: centralized escrow = one party can move funds; 2-of-3 multisig = any two of buyer, vendor, market must co-sign.
Escrow models compared
Happy path: buyer and vendor co-sign on delivery. Dispute path: arbitrator co-signs with the winning party. Central escrow is faster but creates a single honeypot; multisig is slower but removes unilateral release.
| Model | Keys | Release | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centralized | 1 (market) | Market alone | Seizure / exit scam honeypot |
| 2-of-3 multisig | Buyer, vendor, market | Any two agree | Requires collusion of two |
| 3-of-5 multisig | + 2 arbitrators | Any three agree | Highest coordination cost |
Vendor tiers and moderation
Trial vendors face capped volume and manual review of every listing; Verified vendors get standard limits; Trusted vendors get high limits and multisig eligibility. Dispute rate above threshold triggers automatic rate limits, then human review with written rationale.
Fees and settlement flow
Standard escrow carries a published commission; multisig orders carry a reduced rate to incentivize self-custody. Withdrawals batch on a fixed schedule to obscure timing correlation. This archive mirrors the methodology, not live balances.
What absence means
Listings fluctuate with restocks and moderation waves. An absent category reflects inventory or enforcement on that day, not platform status. Check the hub freshness panel before interpreting availability.
Next: mirror verification methodology · Monero vs Bitcoin · OPSEC checklist