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 · Bryan Pellegrino (LayerZero CEO)
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 42 → 42 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 461975468
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T06:51:17.954Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T06:51:28.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T06:51:28.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7qVv8DWJbQ4vxQfn8SaMFv3gpWnnwXZP7Z99snkX7Xsu
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1579 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"1a5338f01cf90029f7db41ec1482c9e0","decided_at":"2026-10-27T06:51:17.743Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0,"findings_hash":"5pQwzwC5yinupwUcVZrdCStV28aYWpcYrWkgiWKFQJcQ","investigation_id":"186066c7-fdf8-4d1c-9560-49ffb3278cf4","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":42,"page_content_hash":"bed23ef480e72ee97586a7ef111887ac8315faa9c12911f90b718beb6f75a3a0","page_slug":"bryan-pellegrino-layerzero-ceo","prev_score":42,"reason":"The core facts hold up: the exploit amount and date, the incident report's March 6 breach start and TraderTraitor attribution, the LayerZero apology and its five-verifier default change, and the lawsuit's defendants, claims, $650M figure and Pellegrino's quotes. The page repeatedly flags the allegations as unproven. The defects are one mis-sourced timeline entry (the CoinDesk April 19 article does not attribute the attack), a likely apology date off by one day (May 8 versus May 9), the wording 'malware' and 'DDoS' where the incident report says session keys and DoS, and an unverified January 2025 endorsement date. The timeline also has several duplicated April 2026 entries. Many aggregator and migration claims were not independently checked.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"subject_status":"operating","subject_status_contradicts_page":false,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}