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 · dTRINITY dLEND
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 42 → 42 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443508961
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-19T01:41:34.128Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7iynmhBLz1uqcqLoAxZAHRnPfyL4Ti1Pi7iythaE9yLj
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1471 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-19T01:41:34.038Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"32a844a0-4b60-4c3c-9c8c-06ae37b7387e","new_score":42,"page_slug":"dtrinity-dlend","prev_score":42,"reason":"The core incident narrative (March 17, 2026 dLEND-Ethereum empty-market liquidityIndex exploit, ~$257K loss, quick pause, pledge to cover losses with internal funds, Fraxtal/Katana-branded-unaffected messaging) is well corroborated by independent security writeups, BlockSec's incident roundup, and DefiLlama's own hack record, and the page appropriately hedges the pledge as a commitment rather than a completed fact. However, the page contains a clear internal factual error: the summary and one timeline entry claim dLEND is deployed on Fraxtal, Ethereum, and Katana, while DefiLlama's own data and dTRINITY's docs show dLEND actually runs on Fraxtal, Ethereum, and Sonic — Katana received only a dUSD deployment via Morpho/Yearn partnerships, not a native dLEND market. The page's own final timeline entry (which correctly names Sonic) contradicts its own summary. This is a reportable accuracy defect, not an editorializing problem — there is no unhedged allegation of wrongdoing on this page, and the single incident is properly attributable to a suffered smart-contract exploit rather than any conduct by the team.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}