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 · Kipseli
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 57 → 57 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462177977
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T18:49:03.513Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T18:49:17.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T18:49:17.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- DtjJVdQMgAw8eXFmpwtpkxzEoPdLnPxe2wtSHBfVPaao
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1482 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"73a1c6f292f57497afb5964df83aa377","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T18:49:03.228Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.3333,"investigation_id":"b8814fbf-589f-4f7f-a118-9a6aaf9a8b00","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":57,"page_slug":"kipseli","prev_score":57,"reason":"Of 12 countable claim findings (one more was excluded because its source blocked the reviewer), 4 were disputed or unverifiable (33%), which falls in the significant-issues band. claim_findings[0] overstates the April 2026 hack count (the source reports 12 incidents over 20 days, not 20+ protocols), and claim_findings[2] presents a 0x hypothetical calculation as a measured estimate. The central allegation that Kipseli was exploited rests on a single passing media mention (claim_findings[1], claim_findings[11]), and the ZachXBT flag is unverified yet stated flatly in the summary (claim_findings[9], claim_findings[10]). Technical claims about the contracts and docs were confirmed, the omission found is minor, and reviewer confidence is moderate, so the penalty sits in the lower part of the band.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":12,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}