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 · Rahul Ravinder Malhotra
- Sequence
- #7
- Score
- 67 → 67 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464925803
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-03T14:04:12.241Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-03T14:04:31.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-03T14:04:31.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6b46ecob3zf3udii9uEQNuTwPqkcwTpwsTmQ9wHaUk5Z
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1159 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"53f1f63eb3fd6b928ffb40ab910428c1","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-11-03T14:04:11.993Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"c9aeffa8-3c0e-48d1-93f8-1cef120ab8fe","judge_def_hash":"750934ecb48272224909b7430fab271676d391380fbc821acbe7ee7e4cac2fa3","new_score":67,"page_slug":"rahul-ravinder-malhotra","prev_score":67,"reason":"Of four claims reviewed, three were confirmed (claim_findings[1], [2], [3]) and none were disputed. The remaining one, the reported June 2024 appointment (claim_findings[0]), could not be checked because the source refused access (HTTP 403). It is excluded from the dispute rate and is a coverage limit, not a defect. The page states openly that this claim rests on one low-credibility source. No omissions were found and the subject status does not contradict the page.","reviewer_def_hash":"3839668b232611e5b26db72079d64745f8e57e919b8a379e79b44ba4a52c845b","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":3,"sequence_num":7,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}