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.
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443514931
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T13:59:41.626Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BcnpzPaYatX2zZCg4pMbPcNdykSpMNH6kxLGhB8NuWHS
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1156 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T13:59:41.071Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"fee02041-4d9a-4f8c-873d-070c0eb8c403","new_score":0,"page_slug":"unidentified-crypto-whale-25-6m-repeated-phishing-drain","prev_score":0,"reason":"The large majority of the page's factual claims — dates, dollar figures, asset breakdowns, the 2023 prior-incident details, and the 90% fund-return history — are corroborated by independently-fetched sources. However, two disputed findings are notable: the AMBCrypto citation for the Blockaid $1.1B/212-incident statistics does not actually contain those figures in the fetched article, and a credible source (CryptoRank) directly contradicts the page's identification of 0x8fEB...F95Ae as the attacker's rather than the victim's address. The investigation also appears to duplicate another AVOID.NET entry covering the identical incident, and its evidentiary base is heavily concentrated in a single on-chain analyst's thread repeated across many aggregator outlets.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}