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 · CrediX Protocol Exit Scam
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 2 → 2 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443521647
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T16:05:22.319Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- DEavwr2wtZ8EeWBGLeKKJU4QXapsACHV6qEsk9r37ttD
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1370 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-26T16:05:22.047Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"17bbcf97-bc64-48ce-b4df-ec30114a0548","new_score":2,"page_slug":"credix-protocol-exit-scam","prev_score":2,"reason":"The core factual chain -- a $4.5M privilege-escalation exploit of a month-old Sonic lending protocol on August 4, 2025, followed by a broken repayment promise and the team's disappearance -- is well corroborated across tier-1 and tier-2 outlets and the page's own body text consistently and accurately hedges the exit-scam characterization as 'suspected' rather than proven. However, the slug and entity_name assert 'exit scam' as unqualified fact, which is not supported by any source consulted: no regulator or law-enforcement body has made a fraud finding, no operator has been named or charged, and at least one independent technical post-mortem (not cited on the page) treats the incident as an external hack from negligent access control rather than insider theft. The page also cites a CertiK Skynet URL that appears to describe a different, older, unrelated Credix project rather than the entity under investigation, and contains one incorrect entity name ('Rines Protocol' instead of 'Rings Protocol').","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}