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 · Kiln
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 44 → 44 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464290625
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T00:17:15.534Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T00:17:26.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T00:17:26.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AdEFpp4Y27fazNtbpotYz1E4kUMoATNPBaeYyQQCLn9r
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1300 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"759f4eb13262167afdf5ddd9a738f147","decided_at":"2026-11-02T00:17:15.463Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.375,"findings_hash":"6KgdX82wKayc6ZWZZPib9ykuhF29ct75a5bL579PnsX5","investigation_id":"d741f743-f792-4294-b5ae-234eb7336353","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":44,"omissions":{"material":0,"total":1},"page_content_hash":"59b38c35f5fe9f04ef68612a7cfc1403c074b5f001f3058e78a4c25c80433823","page_slug":"kiln","prev_score":44,"reason":"The core incident narrative (GitHub token compromise, CI/CD credential theft, the 150,000 SOL payload, the Sept 9 validator exit and the resulting exit queue) matches Kiln's official post and CoinDesk. Weaker points are the Sept 16 date for Kiln's re-enablement publication, the eight-instruction detail, the Van Loon quote, and the CISA download figure, none of which I could confirm from the cited sources. Only part of the page was independently checked.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"subject_status":"operating","subject_status_contradicts_page":false,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}