Verify a decision
Every moderation decision on AVOID.NET is anchored to the Solana blockchain. You don't have to trust us — you can verify cryptographically that we committed to a verdict at a specific moment and have not rewritten it.
How verification works
- We commit. When a moderator accepts/rejects a submission, we serialize the decision into deterministic UTF-8 bytes (
payload_canonical_string), hash it with SHA-256, encode the digest as base58, and write it to Solana inside an SPL Memo v2 transaction. - We store the bytes. The exact bytes we hashed are stored alongside the decision in our database. Anyone can read them and recompute the hash in any language.
- You compare three values. Database hash, your independently-recomputed hash, and the hash inside the on-chain memo. If all three match, the decision is authentic and timestamped.
The on-chain memo format is
AVOID.NET|v1|h:<b58-sha256>|d:<id>|t:<iso>Find a signature on any investigation page's decision log, or run python -m src.verify_decision --signature <sig> for a CLI check.
Decision
review_revise · Goose Finance
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 57 → 57 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464344509
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T03:29:32.040Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T03:29:56.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T03:29:56.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- FTF8dDL69F7tSBYexNrFYDybaMyjnT82oaz4DA1y7xui
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1513 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"b712a26641c6e7cf48b81ad30aad3af8","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T03:29:31.809Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.4,"investigation_id":"951e2e55-f6cd-42e8-bad9-294b110ea4c3","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":57,"page_slug":"goose-finance","prev_score":57,"reason":"Of 10 countable claims (one blocked-source claim excluded), 1 was disputed and 3 could not be found in the cited sources, giving 40%, which falls in the significant-issues band. The core facts held: the March 2026 exploit date, amount and cause (claim_findings[0]) and the CertiK audit counts (claim_findings[4]) match their sources, and the project is still operating. The unsupported items are the 'Low' severity label and #1,911 rank (claim_findings[1]), the 46% coverage figure (claim_findings[5]) and the launch mechanics (claim_findings[10]), plus a one-day-off ATH date (claim_findings[7]) and an outdated TVL figure (claim_findings[8]). The penalty is set at the mild end of the band because the unsupported claims are peripheral to the core allegations, there are no material omissions, and reviewer confidence is moderate.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":10,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}