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 · Humanity Protocol June 2026 Hack
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 18 → 8 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464282947
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-01T23:49:59.751Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-01T23:50:09.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-01T23:50:09.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 631fAE7uSG8hUuKi6joCvEMa2Hfk7HXTXt38hd9o9ruU
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1912 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"bd1f78c09ab08056182b44074d5ef03e","band_override":null,"blocked_count":2,"decided_at":"2026-11-01T23:49:59.489Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.2222,"investigation_id":"95de98f0-3583-4807-92df-49e69f00ec08","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":8,"page_slug":"humanity-protocol-june-2026-hack","prev_score":18,"reason":"Of 12 claim findings, 2 were excluded as source_blocked, leaving 10; 2 of those (claim_findings[2] and [3], the June 12 Quantstamp report date) could not be found in any fetched source, giving 20% disputed or unverifiable and the minor-issues band. No finding was disputed, and the core incident facts (single-laptop multisig, about 141M H drained, 200M minted, about $36M loss, token crash, recovery plan) were confirmed by CoinDesk (claim_findings[0], [1], [8]). The page also omits the July 2026 pivot to enterprise AI and has Hancom, Lazarus and Bithumb details that the cited sources did not support (claim_findings[4], [6]). The reviewer's confidence was low and several cited sources were not fetched, so the penalty is kept at the lower end of the band.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":-10,"scored_claims":9,"sequence_num":4,"severity_override":{"applied":false,"band":null,"from_band":"minor","reason":"The July 2026 enterprise AI pivot is a material omission, but it concerns the company's later direction and does not contradict or change any fact about the June 2026 incident this page documents. The percentage band is already revise, and the pivot is covered by the high-priority coverage gap and a suggested text addition. The unrecovered-funds omission is minor."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}