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.

Decision
review_revise · Dunamu / Upbit
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#3
Score
3830 (-8)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443522309
Off-chain at
2026-08-26T22:07:23.270Z
Anchored at
Block time

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
Dijnqvz96QesorCzJ5mCeiqAUQww7RkYhWrFSxJjE75Q
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2039 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-26T22:07:22.943Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"f4b7d1d8-e03d-4c79-be28-f2db3d0ce5f5","new_score":30,"page_slug":"dunamu-upbit","prev_score":38,"reason":"The reviewer's per-claim array (38 items, not the mismatched 37-item summary block) found zero disputed claims and a disputed_pct of 2.6%, comfortably inside the approve band; the page's core narrative -- the November 2025 hack, the suspected Lazarus attribution, the confirmed 2019 Lazarus/Andariel attribution, and the AML/KYC and FSS sanction proceedings -- is independently confirmed (claim_findings[2], [3], [16], [20], [21]-[24], [28]). However, two of the eight partially_supported findings are not cosmetic: claim_findings[7] shows the page describes the Naver Financial deal as 'consolidating Dunamu's position' when independent reporting says Naver Financial is acquiring Dunamu outright in a ~$10.3B share-swap -- the direction of the transaction is reversed. claim_findings[31] shows the page describes an April 2026 court ruling as a 'partial' reversal of the FIU suspension when it was a full reversal, and omits that the FIU appealed on April 30, 2026, leaving the matter unresolved rather than settled -- a point the reviewer separately flagged as a high-priority coverage gap because it leaves readers with a materially incomplete picture of an active regulatory dispute. That structural omission, not the page's other high-priority gap (which is a sourcing-quality suggestion to cite primary regulator documents, not an error), is what moves this page from a straight approve to a light revise. The remaining partially_supported items (market share, trading volume, an unverified investigating-body name, two date placeholders, and a one-day discrepancy on an unrelated BonkDAO incident) are minor precision issues consistent with the page's otherwise strong sourcing.","score_delta":-8,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}