113 — Client form and version-documentation searches reviewed
September 5, 2026. No matching xinzhai uploader identified.

Two bounded OpenRouter tasks completed: client form/encoding dataflow and contextual versioned-project documentation. Shared incremental spend is$3.2467 against the existing$20 guard;175 bot reports are now terminal. No archive scanner or bot from this wave remains active.

Concrete source review
The captured linuxidc discussion displays a Perl WWW::Mechanize uploader that places clipboard text into code2, supplies poster and submits the Ubuntu site's form. This demonstrates an ordinary scripted uploader. The displayed sample has no encryption or multipart chunking implementation. Its2011 date is a page-displayed claim, not an independently recovered archive date. No connection to the2026 cluster was found.
Source: https://www.linuxidc.net/thread-1685-1-1.html

A separate captured C# gist uses the same generic form-field names for gamedev.pastebin.com. It URL-encodes text before submitting an application/x-www-form-urlencoded request; its multipart branch concerns an image service. This is a different client and target, not the nested encrypted Ubuntu workflow.
Source: https://gist.github.com/MaulingMonkey/505384

Code-index checks
Four Sourcegraph searches tested co-occurrence of code2 or parent_pid with encryption/Base64 functions, then narrowed to paste references or both form-like names. The first three returned100 matches each across29,45 and18 repositories with result-limit warnings. They cannot support exhaustive negatives.
The both-name refinement returned6 matches across2 repositories without a skipped-result warning. Its LLM-related candidate was checked in pinned source: parent_pid is an operating-system parent-process helper; code2 is the second argument of an AST code-comparison routine. Neither is a paste form field there. The other returned paths are Scapy sources, with no uploader relationship established from the returned evidence.
Pinned source: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/9600dev/llmvm/2939932cb03e17df5c7ca66d3b874c465e24e8a0/llmvm/common/helpers.py
Source SHA-256:1b066ede2fea01f3a07fb2b6f8d76ca36fadbd2c5c0c3bfae625c4dc20f22ab5.

Search and access limits
The client bot used4 searches and3 fetches: two retained HTTP200 sources above; a Ruby-client page returned403 and is unavailable. The documentation bot used3 Google searches and1 Baidu request, with no source fetches. Its results were snippets, not verified writeups. Baidu again returned a challenge; this repeated inaccessible route added no coverage. A fifth search attempt was rejected by quota. Do not repeat Baidu or the bots' suggested already-exhausted bare-label/Gitee-host queries.

Exact queries, raw code-index events, source hashes and retained bot fetches are private in113-private. Worker reports CN26R001/R002 remain labelled unverified; this report reviews their usable evidence and limitations. No source code was executed, original paste requested, message sent or payload decrypted. Generic client form names have not supplied the missing implementation link.