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 · Yield Protocol
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 50 → 50 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464369599
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T04:59:10.366Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T04:59:34.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T04:59:34.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7sq4pPqZfi7ptiHBzJqsTpbXKure45qjA6a79wBf6F3u
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1523 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"ee605ec35527354c9bb1377ab5cb4e0c","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T04:59:10.131Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.4286,"investigation_id":"c23832e5-c885-4fee-8d4e-28e2d4ca9576","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":50,"page_slug":"yield-protocol","prev_score":50,"reason":"The core facts hold up: the Immunefi bounty details (claim_findings[0]), the roughly $181,000 April 2024 exploit (claim_findings[1]) and the Euler loss figures (claim_findings[7]) match sources. However, 3 of the 7 checkable claims (about 43%) could not be supported: the ZachXBT flag has no source (claim_findings[4]), the CertiK post-mortem attribution appears to be the page's own inference (claim_findings[5]), and the claim that the incident is cited in DeFi security literature has no source (claim_findings[6]). The Euler recovery date and 'Jacob' alias were only partly supported (claim_findings[2]). One finding was excluded because the source blocked the reviewer (claim_findings[3]). Because the central facts are confirmed and reviewer confidence is moderate, the penalty sits in the lower part of the significant-issues range.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":7,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}