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_revise · XBridge
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 42 → 42 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464349686
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T03:48:06.477Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T03:48:28.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T03:48:28.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- APKUMU4L7hrRwnmjxmtqz4WLeucj73kRWznPxK81zm2J
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1702 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"37e645ba346e13f1f656ab55d60eb8a3","band_override":null,"blocked_count":2,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T03:48:06.243Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.375,"investigation_id":"533ef894-9f56-462a-b4b1-0ba74465f47c","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":42,"page_slug":"xbridge","prev_score":42,"reason":"Of 10 claim findings, 2 were left out because the sources refused the reviewer (claim_findings[3], [5]). Of the remaining 8, 3 could not be verified (claim_findings[2], [8], [9]), which gives about 37.5% and the significant band. The page also treats Kohli's extradition and dismissal motion as pending (claim_findings[0], [1]) and omits the August 2026 rulings, and the stated loss figures do not add up (claim_findings[4]). The reviewer's confidence is low (0.4) and the updates rest on secondary sources, so the penalty is set in the lower half of the band and the page is revised rather than denied.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":8,"sequence_num":4,"severity_override":{"applied":true,"band":"significant","from_band":"significant","reason":"The review reports a material omission: the August 2026 UK ruling rejecting Kohli's extradition challenge and the Boston federal court's rejection of his dismissal bid are missing, and the page presents both as pending. The percentage band is already significant, so this confirms that band rather than moving to a harsher one."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}