See what the reports have in common.

A refund address turns up in two complaints. A storefront appears in the related merchant application. Search each identifier, inspect the returned sources, and keep the questions for the analyst who makes the call.

Two complaints. The same refund address.

The identical address is enough to put the reports side by side. Search it once, inspect any returned public records, and compare them with the messages the buyers supplied.

The storefront has its own history.

A merchant application lists a storefront URL. Search the domain to inspect its registration, current destination, and any dated archive captures.

Compare what the sources show with the seller’s application and the buyer’s report before making a call.

Give every application the same first pass.

For each merchant application, send its contact email and storefront domain to the Search API. Signed completion webhooks let your integration add available source records to the application your analyst already reviews.

Organization investigation

Refund address review

Saved email search

Source cards and links

Saved domain search

Registration and site records

Analyst note

The refund address repeats in two reports. The storefront connection still needs checking against the original messages.

Illustrative project. The searches and note stay together for review.

Hand over the reasoning, not just the alert.

Put searches, complaint files, and notes in an organization investigation. The next analyst can reopen the source records, see what was compared, and follow the question that remains unanswered.

Read the workflow.

Questions before a review.

Start with a reported email, username, domain, IP address, or cryptocurrency address. Search each identifier separately and inspect the available source records. A phone number is not a dedicated Search API input.

Give your fraud team
a source trail to review.

Tell us how cases enter your queue, which identifiers you check, and how many analysts need access.