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 · Wasabi Protocol
- Sequence
- #7
- Score
- 3 → 3 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462905625
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-29T13:55:49.721Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-29T13:56:02.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-29T13:56:02.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BPNTqXzbyLaggKq7uEsBBPGqYruAFWiAtXBXUVkVBw4x
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1469 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"e2cd4956d7bdad4c01b74bbb67cf2578","blocked_count":2,"decided_at":"2026-10-29T13:55:49.624Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.1667,"findings_hash":"9VtdMXvSgFZ5fog9PrRGACUwnwA9GkvFSrZy3MAgXQQN","investigation_id":"994d3e0f-b60a-4242-965c-5a18d3a83a5d","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":3,"page_content_hash":"eeec8d0d6ca9d2b02e919a9d74513cb7bce92a1d0a10c0e8afc32e492e29bcd6","page_slug":"wasabi-protocol","prev_score":3,"reason":"The core exploit narrative (April 30, 2026, compromised sole admin key, UUPS upgrades, loss range of $4.5M to $5.9M) is well supported by Coindesk, Rekt, TechFlow and Forklog, and the page transparently presents the divergent figures and root-cause accounts. Minor issues are the 20x leverage claim (cited source says 2-3x to 10x), the CertiK 'initial $2.9M' estimate that is absent from Forklog, a ZeroShadow attribution not found in TechFlow, and the inference of continued operations from TVL. Two sources were blocked (DefiLlama, CryptoTimes). No later developments were found, and the page hedges appropriately.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":12,"sequence_num":7,"subject_status":"exploited","subject_status_contradicts_page":false,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}