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 · Hefu Chai and Huaisong (Jerry) Xiang
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462054108
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T11:29:38.599Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T11:30:13.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T11:30:13.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- FhND6kiK8VYMS7bhAYsNgh26fKueSqzZSRFL1sFB6Eiv
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1578 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"cafa66a85faf22768e2df5fd4fca7510","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T11:29:38.054Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.2727,"investigation_id":"a4adf77e-73dd-477b-8bf1-3e3e837c1495","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":26,"page_slug":"hefu-chai-and-huaisong-jerry-xiang","prev_score":26,"reason":"Core facts (the charges, statutory maximums, ages, the $50,000 per-defendant figure and the September 15 announcement) were confirmed by independent reporting, and no claim was contradicted outright. Three of the 12 claims that could be checked (25%) could not be verified: the token list, the Kaiko wallet details and the 'widely described as first' framing (claim_findings[9], [10], [11]). Separately, the page says no Robinhood statement existed when one has been reported (claim_findings[7]), it leaves the charging instrument ambiguous when reporting points to criminal complaints (claim_findings[2]), one Blockonomi archive link points to an unrelated article (claim_findings[8]), and the text contains leftover drafting notes. One claim (claim_findings[5]) was excluded because the DOJ source refused the reviewer; that is a coverage limit, not a defect of the page.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":11,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}