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_approve · Seneca Protocol
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 28 → 25 (-3)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 424163077
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-04T03:34:01.388Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- FseTjYEZbUvDhApcogs8G6ryiwJaNnXif1xpVqLtCJoi
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1398 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-04T03:34:01.087Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"d6079310-56eb-4c82-8371-39d462fa9cf3","new_score":25,"page_slug":"seneca-protocol","prev_score":28,"reason":"The reviewer found zero disputed claims across 28 fact-checked statements, with a stated disputed_pct of 4% reflecting one unverifiable claim (the blacklisting of _transferFrom functions, claim_findings[22]) whose primary source returned a 403 error. Five claims are partially_supported, but all involve minor numerical precision issues: the net loss dollar figure overstates by ~$240K relative to spot-value ETH (claim_findings[2] and claim_findings[17]), the Sherlock abandonment timing conflicts between sources (claim_findings[13] and claim_findings[27]), the FixedFloat dormancy period is disputed between Rekt News and a secondary analysis (claim_findings[15]), and the SEN price floor is extrapolated rather than sourced (claim_findings[23]). None of these affect the core factual picture of the exploit mechanics, fund recovery, or prior-warning allegations, which are confirmed by multiple independent Tier 1 security research sources. A small score adjustment of -3 reflects the cluster of imprecisions without warranting a revise.","score_delta":-3,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}