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 · Coinkite / Coldcard
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 18 → 18 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443511512
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T03:44:13.181Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4BvMf31uWx5UjiPAsjSdWsmkg6p6UagfXYywDLcmDuNb
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1372 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T03:44:12.939Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"fa3e4739-2493-471f-b16a-4a0503f66079","new_score":18,"page_slug":"coinkite-coldcard","prev_score":18,"reason":"The large majority of the page's factual claims -- the technical root-cause mechanism, entropy figures (~40 bits Mk2/Mk3, ~72 bits Mk4/Mk5/Q against a 128-bit target), affected firmware ranges, attack-wave amounts and timing, the O'Beirne prior-warning account, the Peter Gray/switck identity allegation, patch versions, data-retention suspension, and legal/industry commentary -- are corroborated by their cited sources and by independent reporting located during this review. Two notable issues were found: the page attributes an all-time superlative ('largest hardware wallet exploit in crypto history') to TRM Labs when TRM Labs' own language is scoped only to 2026, and a Kraken CSO quote in the Industry Impact section is presented as verbatim but does not match his verified wording and is not traceable to the section's cited sources. No link rot or stale claims were identified; sensitive allegations against the CTO are consistently and appropriately hedged as unproven third-party claims throughout the page.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}