Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
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 · Nobitex / Wallex / Bitpin / Ramzinex
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
2 → 2 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443518384
Off-chain at
2026-08-25T23:00:38.932Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
5apMNZaHKXrQ4E76m2uGwP3V2kvzymAr2sdTJQgGYfuA
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1538 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T23:00:38.751Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"a8f09035-635e-4b29-9611-310c173e1f31","new_score":2,"page_slug":"nobitex-wallex-bitpin-ramzinex","prev_score":2,"reason":"The page's core claims — the June 2, 2026 OFAC designation, its legal authorities, the named individuals, the dollar-volume breakdowns per exchange, the Predatory Sparrow hack and its consequences, and the broader Economic Fury campaign timeline — are well supported by primary Treasury/OFAC documents and credible secondary sources (TRM Labs, Elliptic, Reuters via The Block/Unchained/CoinDesk). A small number of claims either misattribute figures to the wrong immediate source (a $2.3B figure credited to 'OFAC alleged' that actually originates from a Reuters investigation; a $1B 'seizure' figure that appears to conflate one entity's routed-funds estimate with a cumulative total), overstate a collective attribution when sourcing implicates only Nobitex specifically (the Central Bank USDT-acquisition claim in the summary), drop a source's hedge (Aghamir's 'likely' leadership role becomes unqualified fact, with unverifiable specificity around software-update counts), or get exact incident dates wrong by a day or two relative to the weight of other reporting (the Predatory Sparrow hack/leak dates). No accepted community submissions exist to independently review.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}