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.

Sequence
#3
Score
2 → 0 (-15)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443516562
Off-chain at
2026-08-25T19:21:52.425Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
FR4WxeiUWAdMmyWQCdN4hFKc9Vt7rYHsy2TFaDmqCK1B
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2196 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T19:21:52.266Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"07e63eaa-1d75-45b0-8fef-47a315a054fd","new_score":0,"page_slug":"cryptomus-xeltox-enterprises-ltd","prev_score":2,"reason":"An independent fact-check found the page's central claims — the FINTRAC penalty amount and grounds, the BC Securities Commission order's issuance, the Federal Court appeal, and TRM Labs' Cryptomus-Heleket linkage analysis — solidly supported by primary regulatory sources, and confirmed that the Cryptomus/Xeltox operating relationship is established directly by two independent regulators rather than inferred by the page (claim_findings[0]). The review did surface two disputed claims — a statistic on 56 exchanges cashing out to sanctioned Russian banks that is credited to TRM Labs but actually originates from independent researcher Richard Sanders via Krebs on Security (claim_findings[7]), and a comparison to a prior FINTRAC penalty that is misdated by a full year (claim_findings[4]) — plus one unverifiable detail about the platform's founder (claim_findings[12]). Most consequentially, the page describes a May 2025 BC Securities Commission order as an open, critical-severity enforcement action without disclosing that the regulator's own Executive Director withdrew the extension application days later, letting the order lapse; this fact is publicly available on BCSC's own hearings page and its omission leaves the page's characterization of current regulatory status out of date (claim_findings[10]). That item falls outside the disputed/unverifiable claim count under the review's scoring rules, but it is flagged here as a high-priority correction alongside the misattribution and date error. Taken together — a 15% disputed/unverifiable rate, solid support for the page's core allegations, and three high-priority correction items including one with real consequence for how a reader understands the company's current regulatory standing — the page merits revision rather than outright approval or denial.","score_delta":-15,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}