Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 · Aptos
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#5
Score
80 → 80 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
456754513
Off-chain at
2026-10-14T07:24:56.676Z
Anchored at
2026-10-14T07:25:04.441Z
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
13pyV8AsTVTxBq5VG2VJLDjNArUzHNUL1JnpGcfB3hhK
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1999 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"01af7cbf60da39b5e8d1723269c007e3","decided_at":"2026-10-14T07:24:56.376Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.3333,"findings_hash":"BFLZesDtQuNRt5wSVwBkdxWA2xkix8wZ3qnbRiZjVXiQ","investigation_id":"41f72fa7-2b33-486c-9df0-5acff8a8040d","mode":"findings_only","new_score":80,"page_content_hash":"65c3c27eb67d201e01fd5c00d41838904f505e3f7012b3a436a43239a279c6c4","page_slug":"aptos","prev_score":80,"reason":"The page's core narrative — Aptos' Meta/Diem origins, its 2022 VC raises and FTX/3AC exposure, the contentious mainnet launch and tokenomics criticism, the Glazer lawsuit, the 2023 security incidents, and the Shaikh-to-Ching leadership transition — is well-supported by multiple independent, credible sources and holds up under review. The most serious problems are two internal contradictions: a Security Incidents section claim that the Numen Cyber Labs vulnerability was disclosed 'immediately after the mainnet launched' when it was actually disclosed five days before launch (contradicted by the page's own timeline), and a timeline entry that misdates the outage-triggering code commit to 'August 2022' when the page's own Security Incidents section (and the official incident report) correctly says August 2023. The May 2026 market cap/FDV figures in the Tokenomics section are also mathematically inconsistent with each other and with independent price data for the period. The BlackRock BUIDL $500M/RWA-ranking milestone is conflated with an earlier, separate November 2024 network-expansion date. Forward-looking 2026 regulatory and tokenomics claims (SEC/CFTC commodity classification, tokenomics overhaul) were independently corroborated via web search and found to be accurate in substance, though sourcing for them leans heavily on official Aptos posts and a narrow set of crypto trade outlets.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}