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_approve · Lien Finance Bond Exploit (July 2026)
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 10 → 10 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443522673
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-27T01:03:43.965Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- JDvHMGFG89D8qc38z9vqSCj1suGqfqQELxBQAWbUwWoZ
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1524 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T01:03:43.537Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"73a3321a-cc8e-4ddc-8492-7393d29c4f78","new_score":10,"page_slug":"lien-finance-bond-exploit-july-2026","prev_score":10,"reason":"Independent verification confirms the page's central claims hold up: the protocol is correctly identified and not confused with the similarly-named 'LienFi' project (claim_findings[0]), the exploit's date, amount, technical root cause, and on-chain addresses are all confirmed against primary security-firm analyses and independently corroborated by a SlowMist alert the page did not even cite (claim_findings[1]-[6]), and the 'no official response' framing was specifically re-checked through the current date rather than left stale (claim_findings[7]). Disputed_pct is 0.0% -- there are no disputed or unverifiable claims, no link rot, and no stale findings. The three partially_supported findings (claim_findings[9], [11], [12]) concern secondary context -- an incomplete credit list in a 2020 historical aside, a one-day date discrepancy for a different protocol's breach folded into an industry-wide 'Hackers' Day' tally, and an unqualified year-to-date DeFi loss figure -- none of which touch the page's core allegation against Lien Finance. No coverage gap is rated high priority, so no lever exists to push the page out of the approve band.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}