No warnings found Nothing found in 506 reviews, the Android app’s code and the store listing. We check costs, ads, pressure and tracking, not everything.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 1.0.10 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.10, updated 2026-01-30.
This analysis describes version 1.0.10 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.10, updated 2026-01-30.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
*Try SILT for free and unlock the full game to continue your journey!*
Dive into a surreal ocean abyss in an atmospheric puzzle-adventure. Explore dangerous waters, possess sea creatures and solve environmental puzzles to discover what lies deep below the surface…
SILT is a surreal underwater puzzle-adventure game. Alone in an underwater abyss, you are a diver searching the deep to uncover long-forgotten mysteries.
Possess the creatures around you to solve puzzles and travel further into the darkness…
Nature has evolved into bizarre forms. Discover strange organisms, unexplored ruins and ancient machinery hidden beneath the water’s surface.
Survive encounters with giant deep-sea goliaths. Harness their power to awaken a long-dormant force at the centre of the abyss.…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
No advertising or mediation SDK among the 1 SDK detected in the package
No advertising or mediation SDK of any kind was found in the package.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:275a7631e55d2cbe7594a649366c16fe2c565c37fe7ecdc530adb01955f38e62Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
No review-based observation is published in this assessment. That does not establish that reviewers had no problems.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 1.0.10, scanned 24 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 1.0.10 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.10, updated 2026-01-30.
This analysis describes version 1.0.10 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-24 .
The store currently lists version 1.0.10, updated 2026-01-30.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
- Performance fixes
No release notes were provided for this version.
siltAssessed 2026-10-27 from 506 user reviews, the app's package and the store listing.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
This assessment is produced automatically. Five independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text, the app manifest and the store listing — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.