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
- 8 → 8 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443513445
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T10:19:09.337Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- HeAoCAPYJJ2R1or9aN7oBLk16wVpzaB8p4S5B9onH863
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1135 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T10:19:08.999Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"d60b5eec-d2d5-4189-9390-291aa8a829cf","new_score":8,"page_slug":"france-dgfip-tax-data-breach-crypto-wrench-attack-enablement-august-2026","prev_score":8,"reason":"The great majority of discrete factual claims -- breach scope and figures, CertiK/Chainalysis statistics, the Waltio and Ghalia C. predecessor incidents, government-response figures, and named case details (Balland) -- are well corroborated by independent tier-1/tier-2 sourcing and direct quotations check out. The page's central causal thesis that the DGFiP breach 'directly amplifies' or has a 'direct operational link' to physical wrench attacks is not supported at the strength asserted; cited sources consistently frame this as a plausible risk rather than an established mechanism, and one attributed quote (Jameson Lopp) and one sourced claim (FrenchBreaches victim-ranking methodology) do not match their cited articles.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}