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 · Allbridge
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 28 → 28 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443561699
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-02T00:39:19.929Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AbLdsmXMFTMJHmr3gT7La8MfxMviNx9U3VA6k3SKoBmt
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1122 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"067df94702056a8eaf75eb44b499a2da","decided_at":"2026-09-02T00:39:19.797Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.0667,"investigation_id":"c2440c5d-c86e-4b7d-bb6a-f3a485c94fe2","new_score":28,"page_slug":"allbridge","prev_score":28,"reason":"The page's core factual claims — three security incidents, their dates, dollar amounts, attack mechanisms, and the SlowMist CCTP post-mortem findings — are well corroborated by independent tier-1 and tier-2 reporting (CoinDesk, The Defiant, The Block, KuCoin's syndication of SlowMist, Cointelegraph). Minor figure rounding exists across sources but is immaterial. The 'systemic pattern / repeat vulnerability' framing in the second and fourth sections rests more heavily on secondary outlets echoing each other than on a primary Allbridge statement, and the page omits a second co-founder (Yuriy Savchenko) alongside Andriy Velykyy. No claims were found to be disputed or link-rotted in this review.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}