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 · DogWifTools
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462281004
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-28T00:54:43.230Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-28T00:55:13.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-28T00:55:13.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 53VjhHy6AsvgExMgH9G8UjkgeTgUwLjtdG8S7CCngmSA
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1609 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"f238d216e8e8325a150322259899b95c","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-28T00:54:42.974Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.2143,"investigation_id":"e05ca87b-8858-4518-b7e5-1ff5395b9bbf","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"dogwiftools","prev_score":0,"reason":"The core incident narrative holds up: trojanized versions 1.6.3-1.6.6, the GitHub-token compromise, the estimated $10M loss and the Jizzy Group manifesto are all supported (claim_findings[0], [7], [8]). Of 14 countable findings (one blocked X source excluded), none were disputed and 3 were unverifiable (the 2025-01-27 date, the license price, and continued operation), about 21%. Five further claims were only partly supported: the $10M loss is called 'documented' (claim_findings[1]), the Binance account claim conflicts with the cited Rekt article (claim_findings[2]), the Halborn quote is not verbatim (claim_findings[3]), the Jan 30 coverage entry lists Halborn, which published in February (claim_findings[4]), and the Solidus wording is loosened (claim_findings[9]). The page's current operating status is also an open high-priority coverage gap. These are overstatements to correct rather than grounds to doubt the page.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":14,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}