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 · 1inch
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#4
Score
62 → 62 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
447713232
Off-chain at
2026-09-17T05:15:48.546Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
FboSQgZgDzrE8meZCr98YY8gUJg83ykSgkJnzQnYBXtm
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1830 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"283966276348597c00689e1186bf03f2","decided_at":"2026-09-17T05:15:48.381Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.129,"findings_hash":"3z263NbFzZJRrLh6qxotLYeLvMHhYyygXZf9C1avJwpy","investigation_id":"a4cc3a16-a934-40c9-8117-a05d45a1f6fd","mode":"findings_only","new_score":62,"page_content_hash":"9cf88c2839c787001b17e83b0fafe2bcd7f4672fbdc9c5b6339e9f6a8372806e","page_slug":"1inch","prev_score":62,"reason":"The page is substantially well-sourced: the founding narrative, corporate structure, all three 2024-2025 security incidents (dollar amounts, dates, resolver-vs-protocol distinctions), the Molfar FSS-Academy allegations (accurately hedged as unverified single-source claims), tokenomics figures, price history, and the Kunz SEC quote all check out against independent reporting. One factual error was found: the October 2024 supply-chain attack is described as a GitHub account compromise, when multiple independent security writeups attribute it to a phished npm/npmjs publishing token, with one source explicitly noting no evidence of GitHub tampering. One dead citation (molfar.com, which now redirects to a generic newsroom page) appears twice and should be removed given a working duplicate citation exists. A handful of granular figures (an exact intraday price point, a specific return timestamp, and the Q3 2025 28.3% market-share figure) could not be independently confirmed within this review's access to primary sources (messari.io and halborn.com returned rate-limit/access errors on repeated fetch) and are flagged as unverifiable rather than disputed. No community-submitted evidence exists on this page to separately evaluate.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}