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
- #2
- Score
- 2 → 2 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443514943
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T14:05:25.180Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6LX55UtoZz3mR6ebtXe5WXsjFt1a9ZtkcVh8dbmqmLq9
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1456 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T14:05:24.679Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"e620d5be-6208-44a1-89e0-67163f0f5c08","new_score":2,"page_slug":"ascendex-insolvency-and-withdrawal-freeze-july-2026","prev_score":2,"reason":"The great majority of this page's factual claims -- the shutdown date and stated reasons, the specific on-chain reserve figures and their sourcing, the ZachXBT warning timeline, the withdrawal-freeze mechanics and insolvency-warning language, and the 2021 hack's dollar figures -- are well corroborated by independently fetched primary and tier-1/tier-2 sources, and the page is notably careful not to overstate the exchange's legal status beyond what its own hedged notices say. Two claims are disputed: the page states the failed transaction's counterparty was undisclosed as of the investigation date when AscendEX had, by all available corroborating evidence, already named it (RIBK Capital) in an official statement; and the page attributes the December 2021 hack to the Lazarus Group using citations that do not support that attribution and against a dedicated incident-tracking source stating the attacker was never identified. Two additional claims are partially supported due to a cherry-picked MiCA framing and an understated timeline for the founder's silence.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}