ProvablyFair.org (@provablyfairorg) / X

ProvablyFair.org

77 posts

ProvablyFair.org

@provablyfairorg

The new standard for Provably Fair Gambling. Open. Auditable. Verifiable.

Online

provablyfair.org

Joined September 2025

Pinned
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Jun 10
Is a provably fair game actually fair? How would a player know? "Provably fair" has become a badge casinos award themselves. Almost every casino claims it. Almost none can prove it. Today we're launching ProvablyFair.org Certification An independent open-source audit standard
00:00
11K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
4h
Should you choose your own client seed, or leave the default? Short answer: yes, it matters, and almost nobody checks it. Set your own. Here's why Everyone checks the server seed. Almost nobody asks where the client seed comes from. That's the part that should worry you.
602
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
19h
Replying to @provablyfairorg
Go deeper: Certification summary: provablyfair.org/casinos/duel Verify your own Duel bets with our verifier build: audit.provablyfair.org/casino/duel/to… Every game repo: github.com/orgs/ProvablyF… More audits are underway. Results will drop as they complete.
509
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
19h
First Audit Live: Duel.com 10 in-house games certified How it works: we rebuild each game from scratch, using only the rules Duel publishes, never their own code. Testing a casino with its own code only proves it agrees with itself. From that rebuild, every game faces a
12K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Jun 10
Replying to @provablyfairorg
First certified casino is Duel.com 10 games 53,475 live bets verified 253M simulation rounds Clone any repo and reproduce it yourself:
Dashboard | Provably Fair Audits
From audit.provablyfair.org
1K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
MARCH 14 We extracted the live code again. Low, Medium and High modes now use fair binomial coin-flip logic, restoring ~99% RTP. If you played Plinko between Dec 17 and March 10, we recommend contacting support to understand how your play was reviewed. This case is also a
GitHub - ProvablyFair-org/winna-plinko: Winna Plinko Investigation
From github.com
2.4K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
VERIFICATION TOOL We’re publishing a tool where affected players can input their seed pairs and see which bets would have produced different outcomes under fair binomial probabilities vs the extracted tables. If you played Winna Plinko during the affected period, you can check
2.9K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
WHY THE “CONFIGURATION ERROR” EXPLANATION RAISES QUESTIONS Winna described the issue as a configuration error where 98% RTP probabilities were applied to normal modes by mistake. However the extracted tables show: • each difficulty had a different probability profile • only
1.7K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
MARCH 10 Winna issued an incident report stating: • the algorithm changed Dec 17 • RTP dropped from 99% → ~98% • this was described as a "configuration error" • affected players could request refunds Our own test account - which placed verified Plinko bets during the
1.8K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
SCOPE Hundreds of millions of bets were placed across all Winna games between Dec 17 and March 10. We cannot determine how many were Plinko bets. However, Plinko was heavily promoted during the Originals 2.0 launch and remained live under these probabilities for nearly three
1.8K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
Across all difficulties, the same pattern appeared. Probability was removed from higher-paying buckets and shifted toward lower-value middle buckets. Examples from the extracted tables: High Risk (16 rows) • 1000x reduced ~32% • 1 in 32,768 → 1 in 48,188 Medium Risk (16
1.7K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
What makes this unusual is how precise the rest of the board remained. For High Risk (16-row): 14 of 17 buckets matched the fair binomial distribution to 10 decimal places. Only three buckets differed: • the two 1000x edge buckets were reduced • the 0.2x bucket absorbed the
1.7K
ProvablyFair.org
@provablyfairorg
Mar 16
Replying to @provablyfairorg
HIGH RISK — 16 rows The extracted probabilities showed the 1000x edge buckets reduced by ~32%. Fair math 1 in 32,768 Actual code 1 in 48,188 The board still displayed 1000x on the edge. But the probability of reaching it was significantly lower.
1.8K