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_revise · Bonzo Finance
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 28 → 18 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443517577
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T22:27:53.827Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4PYMjPBjJmkb25BRCfMyppV2fz8h131AiBxgENj4cZ87
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1401 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T22:27:53.506Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"eb7d60ce-600d-4768-9ba4-a4f9e2120583","new_score":18,"page_slug":"bonzo-finance","prev_score":28,"reason":"The fact-check confirmed the page's core account of the July 11, 2026 Bonzo Lend exploit -- the oracle attack mechanics, dollar figures, TVL impact, and the conclusion that fault lay with a flaw in Supra's oracle verifier rather than Bonzo's own contracts -- against the official incident report, Rekt News, and independent coverage. Two secondary claims were disputed: the page states Bonzo's pre-launch Halborn audit found no critical vulnerabilities, when the audit report actually documents four critical findings that were remediated before launch, and the page's fund-movement section attributes an Ethereum address to a white-hat responder wallet that outside reporting instead ties to the primary attacker's laundering trail. A third claim, that the attacker's funds remain unrecovered, could not be independently confirmed from the cited source. With 3 of 18 checked claims disputed or unverifiable (about 17%) and no problems in the central narrative, the page is sent back for two targeted corrections rather than a structural rewrite.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}