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 · ZetaChain
- Sequence
- #7
- Score
- 51 → 51 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464652463
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T21:49:51.130Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T21:50:11.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T21:50:11.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 559ahQjA62AiCTGHXh9tEGnJLdGtLW4Jq3fZ6Bog62X9
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1278 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"7553b9dd39e4f96ebc112cad57da75f2","blocked_count":3,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T21:49:51.030Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0,"findings_hash":"B2iuGp3M4YSX1ewrqURQ4pVnPoTtCij5hZc2FqRQTAvq","investigation_id":"2f6eca6d-bddc-4eeb-9bac-ad83f94cb1b8","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":51,"page_content_hash":"97d82c1a90588ea2f0831d2512bc64500b99af98aa9b2b68aa3f64dd6da0aac9","page_slug":"zetachain","prev_score":51,"reason":"The core claims on the Proposal 68 vote, the cross-chain wind-down dates and the April 2026 exploit match the cited reporting. One claim is overstated: the exploit drained only team-controlled wallets and no users were affected, while the source also describes abuse of user approvals. Several primary and price sources could not be read. Subject status is consistent with the page, which already describes the project as winding down.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":5,"sequence_num":7,"subject_status":"operating","subject_status_contradicts_page":false,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}