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 · Cronos Chain
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457567788
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T08:18:04.142Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T08:18:05.461Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Zm2y1dX6RedaZ812a4CyZzCqeoqxiqLawVSnq77ZZyd
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2073 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"efc950a43515ca17426d9ece2041bc41","decided_at":"2026-10-16T08:18:03.991Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.16,"findings_hash":"3BfJ5Sm31Czzw95Vz6UTPqRnjZvR5FWa64hVN6dXb7yn","investigation_id":"e3823bba-5389-460a-8e33-c4d19489b6bd","mode":"findings_only","new_score":26,"page_content_hash":"64a76ba5b62020c4ae7bbf000f1562d7807ffe03ff53cdf90a2a84950c374a8c","page_slug":"cronos-chain","prev_score":26,"reason":"The page is well-sourced for the facts available in the first days after the August 30, 2026 incident, and most background claims about Cronos's architecture, its invitation-only 33-validator set, the Cronos Labs/Tectonic/Particle B organizational links, the 2025 CRO reissuance controversy, and the exploit mechanism check out against the cited and independently retrieved sources. However, the page has not been updated to reflect Cronos's own official post-mortem, published roughly a week after the incident (early September 2026) and well before this review: it revises the headline figures sharply upward (approximately $120.4 million in manipulated borrowing, approximately $111.2 million reversed, approximately $9.19 million unrecovered) versus the $75 million / $68.7 million / $6.29 million figures the page presents as current in the summary, three sections, and one timeline entry. Multiple passages explicitly assert that 'no official postmortem' exists; that is now stale. Separately, the Industry Context section misstates its own cited TRM Labs source, which ranks the incident as the third-largest price-manipulation exploit on record and the second-largest of 2026 — not the largest, as the page claims. No accepted community submissions were present to review. Key gaps are the missing post-mortem entry in the timeline, no mention of any compensation outcome in the six weeks since, and no on-chain address-level detail despite citing on-chain researchers.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}