Skip to main content
Sign in
← 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_revise · Radiant Capital
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
180 (-25)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
419386400
Off-chain at
2026-05-13T03:09:59.319Z
Anchored at
Block time

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
7tg6XDFjpwQs8yLFWQjcokuh7aArpT6NWqmTKaVA4FJ3
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1489 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-13T03:09:59.130Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"2cf92517-f3d5-4d4e-ad0a-dcf16473b155","new_score":0,"page_slug":"radiant-capital","prev_score":18,"reason":"The reviewer found 44% of claims either disputed or only partially supported across 25 total claims, placing this page in the 30–60% band requiring revision and triggering under-investigation status. The most serious finding is claim_findings[8]: the Protocol Overview section states the multisig was an '11-of-11' structure when Halborn (Tier 1) and a Tier 2 security analysis both confirm it was a '3-of-11' structure — a critical distinction because the attack succeeded precisely by compromising only 3 of 11 signers, not all 11. Two additional disputes concern date accuracy: claim_findings[20] and timeline entry claim_findings[24] place all three major exchange delistings in 'early 2025' when the actual dates range from July 2025 (Crypto.com) to April 2026 (Binance), and the cited source (BleepingComputer) does not cover delistings at all. The core narrative — both exploit amounts, InletDrift malware, Mandiant's UNC4736 attribution, and the Drift Protocol connection — is well-confirmed by Tier 1 sources, which prevents a higher penalty, but the 11-of-11 error materially misrepresents how the protocol was compromised.","score_delta":-25,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}