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
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 0 → 0 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443505994
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-08T04:17:27.089Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Fd3McZLcfeGDTy9amhHkdSP7ZsC2hKRLZyhQj1vwVFfx
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1600 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-08T04:17:26.848Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"c49012e3-b93a-4bfd-8c00-35468b644e6f","new_score":0,"page_slug":"dprk-lazarus-april-2026-635m-blitz-drift-kelp-combined-campaign","prev_score":0,"reason":"The investigation is factually strong on its core subject — the Drift and KelpDAO attacks, their technical mechanisms, attributions, and financial figures are confirmed by multiple Tier-1 blockchain intelligence sources. However, two claims were disputed. First (claim_findings[2]), the $635M figure in the page title and summary misrepresents available sourcing: that number reflects total April 2026 industry-wide crypto losses, not the Drift+KelpDAO DPRK-attributed total, which is approximately $577M per TRM Labs. This is a title-level framing error. Second (claim_findings[27]), the US court order entry contains two compounding errors: the claimants are terrorism creditors (a relative was killed by North Korea), not kidnapping victims as stated, and the event is dated August 1, 2026, when the Southern District of New York restraining order was issued May 1, 2026 — a three-month discrepancy. Five claims are partially supported, principally the Aave bad debt figure ($177M cited vs. a $123.7M–$230.1M modeled range) and the 80-incident count for DPRK 2025 activity. No link rot or stale sourcing was found. Coverage gaps are medium priority and suggest expansion rather than correction.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}