Skip to main content
Sign in
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 · Ripple Labs
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#1
Score
52 → 52 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
419606669
Off-chain at
2026-05-14T03:35:44.545Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
FGKy2myhYTDgq7SjuXTDXKW44CWYWvc4gYeV1oG39FfD
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (992 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-05-14T03:35:44.469Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"0d0cf043-b55f-48c3-b767-2d9af30f9828","new_score":52,"page_slug":"ripple-labs","prev_score":52,"reason":"The investigation page is substantively accurate on the core legal narrative of the SEC enforcement action and its resolution, with all major dollar figures, dates, and legal conclusions confirmed by primary or high-tier secondary sources. The main factual errors are a misdating of the 'Ripple Labs' name adoption (the page says 2015; it was actually 2013), an ambiguous description of the XRP founder allocation, and an overstatement of the immediacy of the XRP price drop following the SEC complaint. No claims were found to be disputed by more credible sources, and no cited URLs appear to suffer from link rot based on availability testing.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":1,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}