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 · Trezor
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
62 → 62 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
424317588
Off-chain at
2026-06-04T20:39:55.764Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
Rb9AKCmtneVT8Tdss7n2C1KDJQqRTfjUBvx8sNJWWeC
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (974 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-04T20:39:55.669Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"3f8ad1aa-b016-4d23-bc55-23c6bfeee1c4","new_score":62,"page_slug":"trezor","prev_score":62,"reason":"The investigation is substantially accurate and well-sourced; 17 of 24 discrete claims are fully confirmed by independent sources. The single disputed finding — that Trezor patched the Ledger Donjon Safe 3 vulnerability via firmware — is a material error contradicted by Trezor's own explicit statement. The five partially-supported claims involve minor attribution discrepancies (Eric Michaud quote not in the primary cited source, Calendly attack mechanism mischaracterized as credential-harvesting rather than app-authorization), and one omission (product line does not list Safe 7). No link rot was detected across checked URLs.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}