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 · Ethena
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 38 → 38 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426514497
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-14T23:16:00.067Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BjYtrejo1As3it6jCJYXVd5qAhzxNo6RDHta6R8mzm9V
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1687 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:00.013Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"325d327c-4f88-4c31-abb2-987378d35669","new_score":38,"page_slug":"ethena","prev_score":38,"reason":"Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Ethena is a legitimate, actively operating DeFi protocol that has experienced a real regulatory sanction (BaFin MiCA enforcement), two third-party infrastructure attacks, and a Binance-specific exchange liquidity event that was not a protocol-level depeg. None of the incidents constitute fraud, exit scam, or Ponzi mechanics by Ethena itself — the incidents were either suffered by the entity (hacks, exchange infrastructure failure) or reflect genuine regulatory compliance friction under a new EU framework. The page's score of 38/WARNING conflates third-party-caused incidents with entity misconduct, mischaracterizes BaFin's violation basis, and relies on a depeg narrative that its own cited source explicitly rejects. CAUTIONARY (58) is appropriate: the BaFin enforcement action is real and material, the structural risks of delta-neutral synthetic dollars are genuine, and the funding rate/counterparty concentration risks warrant disclosure; but the protocol is legitimate, overcollateralized, institutionally backed (BlackRock, Kraken, Series B), and actively engaging regulators — placing it well above the WARNING band's threshold of 'elevated fraud/loss risk or unresolved severe incident.'","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}