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.
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 8 → 8 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457473853
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T02:40:04.153Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T02:40:15.251Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- HEXiLjDLpALVA1dGakPyCnhuVWkVb4UTeSTSKUhcFAXe
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1960 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"96bf7943d8dd816d1c7d1420e6cf9a37","decided_at":"2026-10-16T02:40:03.906Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.1818,"findings_hash":"A1UgeKJgni2CnULCy7dLw8zKuR3o7CzSdczAAgBqsViA","investigation_id":"2c868a62-22c9-4050-8b38-3e0b960dec83","mode":"findings_only","new_score":8,"page_content_hash":"7231d56394f016db87b76f95b07afb5b5e30c02ae7f2d6144766b0e343b90606","page_slug":"june-2026-cross-chain-bridge-exploit-127m-three-protocols","prev_score":8,"reason":"The page's central, loudest claim -- the alleged $127M three-protocol exploit -- is correctly and thoroughly debunked: independent search confirms no Tier 1/Tier 2 outlet, analytics database or security firm corroborates it, the named protocols do not exist in any registry, and the sole source (Nadcab Labs) is a low-credibility marketing blog whose own FAQ contradicts its own article. The Wormhole premise-check, the Syscoin on-chain evidence (addresses and transaction IDs verified exactly against Rekt News), the Taiko and KelpDAO incident summaries, and the TRM Labs attribution statistics all independently check out. However, the page's own 'verified' counter-narrative is not flawless: it states the Humanity Protocol hack drained 'about 18,510 ETH... and 1,548 BNB,' a level of specific detail that does not appear in any source consulted (CoinDesk, Halborn, crypto.news, The Defiant all report amounts in H tokens, not ETH/BNB) -- an irony given the page's own warnings about fabricated specificity. The page also omits ZachXBT's widely reported doubt that the Humanity Protocol hack was genuine, and contains an internal contradiction: it claims 'CoinDesk's June 2026 bridge coverage yields only the Taiko exploit,' while two sections later citing a CoinDesk article about the June 9 Humanity Protocol hack.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}