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 · Quark Drainer
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464778252
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-03T05:17:57.560Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-03T05:18:23.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-03T05:18:23.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 2iSAz5yUfac59ndCV57PrDUsLPLn8bPgimtjJgyvNrsp
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2556 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"76c045ecbc2e76b59a0f5e0ee6281662","blocked_count":6,"decided_at":"2026-11-03T05:17:57.380Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.15,"findings_hash":"3QNqxwEBtu9vccqV3XTvjvw7GJwZGZwHAN61QGtprZWq","investigation_id":"083dd2eb-bd54-452d-884d-96a3b2872725","mode":"findings_only","new_score":0,"page_content_hash":"a2f0ff35b62bb1b94540539afdbf42129e32731e5080015282b5bd8f6e35a042","page_slug":"quark-drainer","prev_score":0,"reason":"The page's core framing -- Quark Lab/Quark Drainer as a flat-fee, multi-chain DaaS toolkit that Blockaid's June 2026 research names the most prolific drainer operation in its tracking dataset, paired with a companion macOS infostealer documented by Intel 471 and KELA -- holds up against the sources that could be independently fetched: the Blockaid blog, Intel 471 blog, KELA Cyber report, PhishDestroy figure, Scam Sniffer/CryptoNews loss statistics, and crypto.news's H1 2026 Blockaid report all say what the page says they say. Several specific errors were found: Angel Drainer's shutdown is misdated (page says March 2024; independent reporting places it in July 2024), a timeline entry misattributes Intel 471's $3,000/month price to the infostealer component alone rather than the combined offering, the drainer-commission percentages for Inferno/Angel (15-20%/20%) are not supported by the cited Ledger Academy source and run lower than the 20-30% independently reported, and the page contains an internal numerical inconsistency between a '480 wallets / 90 networks' figure (sections[1]) and the '440+ wallets / 90+ networks' figure attributed to the same underlying forum ad in the timeline. A large share of the page's most specific technical and pricing detail rests solely on cybercrime-forum advertisements that could not be independently read in this review (bot walls, and in two cases the reviewing model's own safety filter blocked the carding-forum URLs outright), which materially limits how much of the page could actually be checked rather than merely triangulated through secondary research citing the same forums. No evidence of a shutdown, hack, or law-enforcement/OFAC action against Quark Lab was found, consistent with the page's own hedge.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":20,"sequence_num":5,"subject_status":"operating","subject_status_contradicts_page":false,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}