Automated Attribution of Unknown Cryptocurrency Wallets to Nearest Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) through Blockchain Intelligence APIs
Ministry of Home Affairs
Reasonable choice. The scoreboard liked it. The scoreboard is not the one asking questions on the day.
Worth considering. Real, precisely specified and demoable on public chain data, but attribution accuracy is bounded by the VASP label set that commercial tools sell — assemble the best open labels you can, handle mixers honestly, and be clear how this differs from its sibling SIH26183. Roughly 70–160 teams are expected to go here.
The receipts
Every red flag on this statement, in full. These are the four places it bites.
Exhibit A
The accuracy depends entirely on a VASP deposit-address label set, and good labels are exactly what commercial services sell, so open coverage is sparse and your attribution will have gaps
It gets worse
Commercial tools like Chainalysis already solve this, so a judge will ask what a student build adds beyond a thinner version
Still reading?
Mixers, bridges and privacy chains break the trace, and the description's own laundering context means the hard cases defeat naive tracing
And the finisher
It overlaps SIH26183 from the same ministry heavily, so be ready to explain the distinction
The damage report
Every score this statement earned, and what each one actually costs you.
Feasibility
3/5Buildable. Not comfortably. There is a week in here you have not planned for yet.
Blockchain data is fully public and traceable and exchange-wallet clustering is a documented technique, but the accuracy hinges on a labelled dataset of exchange and VASP deposit addresses — commercial services sell exactly this and open labels are sparse, so your attribution coverage depends on how good a public or self-built label set you can assemble.
Innovation scope
3/5Mildly interesting. The novelty will not carry the room; the build has to.
Blockchain tracing and exchange clustering are established, so your room is in the multi-chain coverage, the nearest-VASP path logic and the labelling quality rather than in the concept, and commercial tools already do this well.
Clarity
5/5The ask is unambiguous, which quietly removes your favourite excuse.
The description defines the investigative context, the exact output — nearest exchange or VASP accepting direct deposits — the specific chains to support and the SAHYOG integration, making the requirement precise.
Acceptance potential
3/5Middle of the pack. This statement will not win the room for you — you will have to.
The problem is real and the specification is precise, but commercial tools like Chainalysis already do this and the core dependency is a VASP deposit-address label set that is exactly what those companies sell — so your attribution accuracy is bounded by the sparse public labels you can assemble, which a judge will probe.
Effort
MassiveA semester of work wearing a hackathon costume. Something is getting cut; decide what now, not in week five.
Multi-chain transaction ingestion and tracing, exchange-cluster labelling, the nearest-VASP path logic and the portal integration is a large multi-chain data-engineering effort.
Demo-ability
EasyEasy to demo — and so is everyone else's. Working is the floor here, not the achievement.
Tracing a wallet's funds along a path until they hit a named exchange is a concrete, investigative-looking demo that reads clearly to any judge.
Data
None suppliedNo dataset comes with this one, so every accuracy figure you quote is a number about labels you invented.
Nothing is provided with the statement. You are sourcing, cleaning and labelling it yourself, and that work is invisible in the demo but very visible in the questions.
The demo they will have already seen
Somewhere around 70–160 teams are heading here, and the description is doing the choosing for most of them. They will read the same brief, reach the same architecture, and build a version of the same demo you are planning. Being correct is the floor. If your five minutes could be swapped with the team before you and nobody in the room would notice, you have not picked badly — you have built predictably, which costs exactly the same and hurts more.
What survives
The ground worth standing on when the questions start.
- Blockchain data is fully public, so the transaction tracing runs on real on-chain data with no access barrier
- Tracing funds to a named exchange is a concrete, investigative demo that a law-enforcement judge immediately values
- Exchange-cluster labelling is a documented technique with open label sets like those from the WalletExplorer lineage to start from
Nothing here is fatal. It is just the list of places this statement pushes back, and you now get to push there first.
The framing is a joke. The findings are not — they are the same analysis on the statement page, and every line above is attached to a score or a fact in the record. It is one opinion with its reasoning attached, so argue with it before you trust it.