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_approve · TexCat
- Sequence
- #10
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464245583
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-01T21:35:55.856Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-01T21:36:42.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-01T21:36:42.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- CsRq1CJL5Lvq4QrgqcqP6HLkjGxgXH8Vaduafjq5KXz
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1489 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"cec45b74d28acbeb99856532ed3f9d1d","band_override":null,"blocked_count":3,"decided_at":"2026-11-01T21:35:55.583Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"7a9e565d-b19d-4921-9eed-3ebdf264b9cd","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"texcat","prev_score":0,"reason":"Of 7 claim findings, 3 could not be read because the sources refused access (claim_findings[3], [4], [5]) and are left out of the calculation. Of the remaining 4, none are disputed or unverifiable, so the disputed share is 0%. The DEXTools figures (claim_findings[0], [1], [2]) match the fetched pages, and the search found no enforcement action or shutdown (claim_findings[6], subject_status). The review lists a high-priority gap on holder concentration, mint/freeze authority and liquidity lock, but the page already states that this analysis could not be sourced and hedges the unreadable figures, so this is a suggestion for expansion and not a reason to revise. The share of claims that could not be read is large (3 of 7), which limits how far this review can vouch for the Blockspot and Solana Compass figures.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":4,"sequence_num":10,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}