Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 · Bits of Gold
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
52 → 52 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443513576
Off-chain at
2026-08-25T12:04:10.292Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
6hCwSqgbMmvBmsrkgzDrqyv8XXCKkQ43ayEmG2DvSVE2
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1080 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T12:04:10.044Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"f6ef462c-3310-40dd-b49b-601f0a2b73b4","new_score":52,"page_slug":"bits-of-gold","prev_score":52,"reason":"The page's coverage of the August 2026 data breach and the underlying CVE-2026-72898 Metabase vulnerability is accurate, well-sourced, and corroborated in fine detail (CVSS scores, affected version ranges, scan statistics, named victims) across independent security-research and news sources. The weakest part of the page is the Regulatory History section, which mischaracterizes the 2017-2019 Bank Leumi litigation by misattributing the 2017 ruling to the Supreme Court rather than the District Court and overstating the 2019 settlement as a clear industry-wide legal precedent, a framing contradicted by at least one credible source and not supported by the page's own cited article, which predates the 2019 event it is cited for.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}