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.
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 22 → 22 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457484780
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T03:19:02.905Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T03:19:31.587Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AviqYNM3HYGhNFAToHTcm6Mxo9hKcCQkvK2WMuKWGQa2
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2046 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"993c022e66b0ba3da25fdc95b8f1b1dc","decided_at":"2026-10-16T03:19:02.698Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.2105,"findings_hash":"7NJFewtESaHKWFSkMF2HYjujUKYFpmjQS3JaDPzAYGmf","investigation_id":"c4c14081-8d50-49af-8b76-783b23252d59","mode":"findings_only","new_score":22,"page_content_hash":"d00a92f299a6c05dd4e0fd9d35cfc5eac0cffc2c4b41035cc3e139804222a757","page_slug":"b-network-bsquared-bitcoin-layer-2-staking-contract-exploit","prev_score":22,"reason":"The core incident narrative — date, amount drained, BNB Chain location, upgrade-authority root cause, sale proceeds, fund-flow routing through NEAR Intents/HOT Protocol toward Zcash, and the legal-immunity bounty offer — is well-supported by the cited sources and corroborated by independent reporting not even cited on the page. The page is also commendably careful in several places to flag uncertainty (unconfirmed attacker address, low-confidence 30% price-decline figure, unconfirmed Discord-ticket detail). However, the 'Broader Context' section fabricates a named label — 'Hackers Day,' attributed to Blockaid — that does not appear in either cited source or in any independent reporting found via search; this is the most significant defect on the page and appears twice (heading and body) plus a related unsupported claim that Blockaid 'flagged the cluster as part of a broader pattern.' A secondary issue is the B2 price-decline figure (15%), which is correctly sourced to cryip.co but incorrectly also attributed to CoinPedia (which reports no percentage), while a Tier-2 outlet not cited by the page (AMBCrypto) reports a much larger initial price drop that the page does not address. The Buzz-platform '600,000 users' figure could not be verified anywhere, including in the page's own cited source for it, though the companion '140 million transactions' figure is independently confirmed.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}