How PEGTrace was built
A short, curated history of the decisions behind PEGTrace — what we chose to build, and what we deliberately chose not to. Eight milestones, no jargon.
The problem, stated plainly
Fraud victims were handing banks, police and lawyers a folder of screenshots. Every reader had to re-establish trust from scratch. We started PEGTrace to fix the record, not the recovery.
One report, many contributors
We settled the core idea: victims, analysts, attorneys and institutions each contribute to a single case record instead of producing separate, unlinked documents.
Tamper-evident by design
Every contribution is sealed into an append-only record. Nothing is edited after the fact — corrections are added, never overwritten.
Public verification
We published /verify so any recipient can independently confirm that a report they were handed is the one that was issued, without needing an account.
Bring your own tracing output
PEGTrace does not compete with tracing vendors. We added structured intake so findings produced elsewhere can be composed into the same record with attribution intact.
Reports built for the desk that reads them
Purpose-built outputs for the audiences that actually act: law enforcement referrals, bank and insurer submissions, and court-ready exhibits.
Bilingual from the ground up
Full English and Spanish across the product and the public site, because fraud does not stop at a language border.
Pilot readiness
Documentation, vendor diligence materials and published policies completed so institutions can evaluate PEGTrace through their normal review process.
We are onboarding pilot institutions now. If you handle fraud referrals, claims or prosecutions, we would like to hear how the record reaches your desk today.