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 · IronWorm npm Supply Chain Attack
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 0 → 0 (-15)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464443524
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T09:23:11.402Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T09:23:22.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T09:23:22.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- FevJcj7u1BMQWrV7pckvoZGX4qi8DtioJ2tXce5TWePH
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1336 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"4470fda6ed89d05337e4311f7e59e1ce","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T09:23:11.132Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.375,"investigation_id":"bd576f8e-de69-4776-9825-0f7bb35637f1","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"ironworm-npm-supply-chain-attack","prev_score":0,"reason":"Six of the 15 reviewed claims (40%) were disputed or could not be verified, which falls in the significant-issues band. The disputed items are mostly timeline and framing errors: an unsupported SlowMist attribution for the disclosure (claim_findings[9]), a JFrog publication date two days late (claim_findings[10], [11]), and a Cursor path typo (claim_findings[2]). Two further timeline claims could not be found in sources (claim_findings[7], [14]). The core technical account (compromised asteroiddao account, 36-37 packages, eBPF rootkit, Exodus module, 57 commits across nine organizations) was confirmed against JFrog, so the penalty sits at the low end of the band.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":-15,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}