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 · four.meme
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 53 → 53 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462183879
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T19:10:03.777Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T19:10:10.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T19:10:10.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BdxFfLscNMJ38HroA2AZPdGsuj2qAh2FWVUkmHaaxx11
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1440 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"cea653845121d25d77d2b5182291be42","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T19:10:03.421Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.375,"investigation_id":"1be02c1b-0438-4836-bcbb-18f74708862e","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":53,"page_slug":"fourmeme","prev_score":53,"reason":"Of 8 claims checked, 3 could not be verified (claim_findings[1], [6], [7]), which puts the unverified share at 37.5% and in the significant-issues band. The core exploit facts, loss ranges and the October 2025 pollution attack were confirmed (claim_findings[0], [5]), and the review found no omissions and no sign the project has shut down, so the penalty sits at the lower end of the band. The unverified items are the ZachXBT flag, which the page itself admits is unconfirmed, an unsourced claim of no regulatory investigation, and a compensation claim the cited article does not mention. Separately, claim_findings[2] suggests the page reverses FixedFloat's role (it appears to be the attacker's funding source, not the laundering route), and the interval between exploits is five weeks, not six.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}