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_revise · B² Network (BSquared) — Bitcoin Layer-2 Staking Contract Exploit
- Sequence
- #6
- Score
- 22 → 22 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464341770
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T03:20:06.002Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T03:20:13.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T03:20:13.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 55k5rD16D3jDXekaoqSfTphnZWnzTrpbv57EeSq9hpUa
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1712 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"48e9b6d4fd817174e83b16cc29b87f17","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T03:20:05.722Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.1818,"investigation_id":"c4c14081-8d50-49af-8b76-783b23252d59","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":22,"page_slug":"b-network-bsquared-bitcoin-layer-2-staking-contract-exploit","prev_score":22,"reason":"Of 10 checked claims, none were disputed and 2 could not be verified (claim_findings[4], the 'contained with no further impact' wording, and claim_findings[9], the Lookonchain-attributed $35.55M combined-loss figure), giving 20% unverified, which falls in the minor-issues band. The core allegations (upgrade-authority compromise, 8.591M B2 / about $3.86M loss, the 10% leniency offer, the laundering path, the Verus details) were confirmed against Tier 1 and Tier 2 sources. A high-priority coverage gap, the lack of a primary source such as the official X post or an on-chain transaction, keeps the page from a clean approval, but the penalty is kept small because the unverified items are peripheral and the page already hedges its secondary sourcing. The review found no material omissions, and the project is not reported shut down or sanctioned.","replaces_fact_checks":{"score_before_fact_checks":30,"undone":1},"reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"score_limit":{"applied":-8,"limited":false,"proposed":-8,"rule":"second_opinion_agreed","second":-8},"sequence_num":6,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}