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.
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 2 → 2 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443513344
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T10:17:37.125Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9CZP9PrfbAKodCufVEP6eH2EpSjYCEQMxSrjhGQwvm2F
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1137 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T10:17:36.690Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"d9de73f6-b05b-4329-858b-caf586a1203b","new_score":2,"page_slug":"vanta-stealer-python-infostealer-targeting-crypto-wallets","prev_score":2,"reason":"The page's core technical claims (file structure, targeted data categories, dynamic module retrieval, published SHA256 hashes, and antivirus detection names) are well supported by direct verification against the primary Point Wild report and PCRisk's independent removal guide. However, the review found a mischaracterized deobfuscation tool name ('PyArmor Shot' vs. the sourced 'PyArmor Static Unpack (OneShot)'), an internal date inconsistency between the CyberSecurityNews timeline entry and the page's own archive.org metadata, an unsupported attribution of an evaluative judgment to unnamed 'researchers,' a slight overstatement of PyArmor's layering, and no page-level disambiguation from the unrelated legitimate company Vanta (vanta.com).","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}