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 · Lighter
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#3
Score
62 → 50 (-12)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443524833
Off-chain at
2026-08-27T08:10:43.872Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
D41RyqvBxKBNdk2JsKwnmDvnyxLcGKo34UEjEEQhjUYq
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1703 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T08:10:43.598Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"57ca093a-20b9-4376-b1f3-da1709c2243e","new_score":50,"page_slug":"lighter","prev_score":62,"reason":"Independent review confirmed the large majority of this page's factual claims (26 of 33), including its core technical description of Lighter's zk-rollup architecture, funding history, and founder background, which held up against independent sources such as L2BEAT and Fortune. However, review disputed three claims that matter: the page wrongly states no public audit could be located, when a named zkSecurity audit from January 2024 is published on Lighter's own documentation site (claim_findings[10]); a user-compensation claim is attached to the wrong incident, which obscures a separate and more serious October 10, 2025 outage the page never mentions (claim_findings[13]); and the private-beta launch date is off by roughly a full year against the founder's own public statement (claim_findings[24]). These sit alongside a token-allocation figure that does not sum to 100% against the page's own cited source (claim_findings[15]) and two coverage gaps the reviewer flagged as high priority. At a disputed-plus-unverifiable rate of about 12%, the page's overall reliability remains solid enough to avoid investigation or delisting, but the specific errors -- particularly the false claim of no audit, which understates rather than overstates the subject's risk profile -- justify revision and a moderate score reduction rather than approval as-is.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}