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 · Nexera
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 49 → 49 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464268206
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-01T22:57:26.409Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-01T22:57:36.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-01T22:57:36.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- H28t7rC85xKpswJaahFKSBejAKQf1TgBNxg3fEF8LTo7
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1403 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"6abe8828a67a22c2287669fc167f317b","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-11-01T22:57:26.106Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.5,"investigation_id":"93c20340-5fab-43fa-a4d9-92949c3b2d9f","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":49,"page_slug":"nexera","prev_score":49,"reason":"Of 14 claims checked, 1 was disputed and 6 could not be verified (7 of 14, 50%), which falls in the significant-issues band. The rebrand date of early 2023 is contradicted by the cited source, which dates it to February 2024 (claim_findings[0]). The BonqDAO causation, the ISO 27001 claim, the BeaverTail malware name, the list of exchanges used as exit venues and the burn-announcement quote could not be confirmed from the cited sources. The core August 2024 hack figures were confirmed by two independent secondary sources (claim_findings[4], [7]) and the reviewer found no unreported shutdown or sanction, so the penalty sits at the lenient end of the band. The reviewer could not read the primary post-mortem (HTTP 403), which is the high-priority coverage gap.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}