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 · Storj Labs
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 58 → 58 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457642341
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T12:45:42.327Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T12:45:45.518Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- GDXJE1oVVYYadm6c3bRdjbovuucvEY2zn5gnagQNg8fa
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2176 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"b7b1bc4caa7e98aff14c8a5c5ae5c7b6","decided_at":"2026-10-16T12:45:42.107Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0,"findings_hash":"CkD3Xvy3FaVgJmGR9ECzidNMQoY8h7FCe6HKLHQqgLJU","investigation_id":"f12aad5f-8d71-4276-a66a-901e1f6e10e1","mode":"findings_only","new_score":58,"page_content_hash":"329dc7d187c781305307b15a6a62617b4174abe4cc8cd53f75eea07af6f681f7","page_slug":"storj-labs","prev_score":58,"reason":"The page is well sourced and its claims hold up strongly against independent verification. Every major factual assertion checked — the filing date, court and case number, funding history, token price moves, the node-operator held-amount schedule, the equity-conversion proposal and its lack of disclosed terms, and the broader week-of-crypto-failures context (BitMEX, BitMart, Movement Labs, aggregate 2026 shutdown statistics) — was confirmed against at least one credible source, and in most cases against two or more independent outlets. All cited URLs that were checked resolved and supported the claims attributed to them; none exhibited true link rot on the live-article level. Two softer issues were found: (1) the node-operator section states with more certainty than its cited source that operators sit in the 'general unsecured creditor tier,' when the source itself treats that classification as unresolved and court-dependent; and (2) the BitMart 'over nine million users' figure traces to BitMart's own multi-year-old self-reported marketing material rather than to any of the four sources cited in that section, and its 2026 currency is unverified. Separately, a data-integrity defect was found in sources_used: the archive_url stored for the Blockonomi citation points to an unrelated TRON price article rather than the Storj bankruptcy piece, even though the live Blockonomi URL itself is correct and supportive. No disputed or stale claims were identified, and accepted_submissions is empty, which is not itself a defect but limits independent community corroboration.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}