Why this design

Concept: Dynamo-style replicas compare Merkle trees so that repair costs grow with the difference, not the data; I build the same way, verify with evidence and fix only what is wrong, so each displayed record here is a leaf you can check.

Information architecture: the page is the tree. The first screen is its top three levels, the root and the identity and results subtrees, joined by real branches that turn green as they verify; then the whole tree drawn as an icicle, then each subtree in the order a hiring manager needs it, and the sticky bar is your hash path from the root to the claim you are reading.

The hashes are real: SHA-256 through SubtleCrypto, with the 0x00 leaf and 0x01 node prefixes and the split rule of RFC 6962; Proof replays the audit path for one claim, and Tamper finds a changed claim by comparing a handful of hashes.

The page ends on the avatar as a replica of the page: one tile per claim, sharp when the claim verifies and stale when it does not, which is exactly what the anti-entropy portrait at the top repairs.

Honesty about scope: a hash proves integrity, not truth, so evidence is its own column; numbers I have not re-measured, like the JVM labs, are marked SKIP and not quoted; if your browser cannot hash, the page says so instead of pretending.

Type: Chivo for claims and headings, Chivo Mono only for hashes and labels, one family with a matched mono, like two replicas that should agree.

Colour: warm grey paper and ink, spruce only for a hash that matches and terracotta only for one that differs, always with a check or a cross beside it.

Motion and accessibility: the portrait plays once and holds; verify walks leaves then levels; "Pause animation" (then "Resume animation") freezes the portrait and makes every check finish instantly, so verifying still works while motion is off; reduced motion shows results at once; the drawn tree is mirrored by the subtree list, and every check is written in words.