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_approve · Alameda Research
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
0 → 0 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
419529041
Off-chain at
2026-05-13T18:59:19.256Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
2U6EXSNUVehrJmF2cEYMy8dW8t446nENstWWhJ8V4AMY
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1016 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-13T18:59:18.969Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"4c5439c3-094c-49f2-b1a2-eae3af219512","new_score":0,"page_slug":"alameda-research","prev_score":0,"reason":"The Alameda Research investigation page is substantially accurate across 27 of 32 claims, with all core allegations confirmed by Tier 1 regulatory sources (CFTC, DOJ, SEC). A single disputed numerical claim on the Miami Heat arena naming-rights cost (page states $205M; sources confirm $135M) represents 3% of total claims and does not affect the factual integrity of the investigation. Three partially supported claims involve minor paraphrasing precision issues that preserve factual substance. High-priority coverage gaps (on-chain transaction analysis) represent expansion opportunities, not validity concerns. Reviewer confidence of 0.87 supports approval.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}