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_approve · TypeSol
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 40 → 40 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464116620
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-01T13:55:31.098Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-01T13:55:51.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-01T13:55:51.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AMJM4vhECr17jCfrMZzY8xQuDxnv7baVziyYEb69N1Ku
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1461 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"e3c88a38718a0c23a26e83dbd53f3fd5","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-11-01T13:55:30.610Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"714290d2-b12f-4d11-b587-9c67d394355f","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":40,"page_slug":"typesol","prev_score":40,"reason":"Five of the six claims checked were confirmed against the project's own website (claim_findings[0,1,2,4,5]), and none were disputed or unverifiable, so the disputed share is 0%. The sixth (claim_findings[3], the Solscan link) could not be checked because Solscan returned a 403 error. It is left out of the count and is a limit on the review, not a defect of the page. The page labels its statements as self-described, says the token's safety is unassessed, and makes no on-chain claims. The review reports no omissions and no shutdown, exploit or sanction. The open high-priority gap on on-chain token analysis (mint and freeze authority, holder concentration, liquidity) is a suggestion to expand the page. The page already discloses it as unassessed, so it does not change the verdict.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":5,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}