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 · StableMagnet
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464269848
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-01T23:03:02.546Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-01T23:03:26.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-01T23:03:26.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 2mk1dAFMhs1d1pBH385XVPjTKg4xZK979mFa9r11yet3
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1778 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"43706de8d169884d9f029125e10a731e","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-11-01T23:03:02.193Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.3571,"investigation_id":"3699ba84-0fa1-46e7-9d11-c82e2519a088","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"stablemagnet","prev_score":0,"reason":"Of 14 checked claims, 3 were disputed and 2 could not be verified, so about 36% did not hold up, which falls in the significant-issues band. The three disputed findings (claim_findings[0], [1], [2]) all concern one claim: that about $24M, or most of the stolen funds, was returned by December 2022. The Quadriga page cited for that figure does not contain it, and Revoke.cash says only a small part is confirmed returned. The page also omits that arrests and the police seizure happened in August 2021 (omission_findings[0]), and the AnySwap bridge route, the per-token split and the ZachXBT flagging are unsupported. The core incident is well supported (the June 2021 rug pull, about $27M lost, the SwapUtils library, the TechRate audit gap), so the page is revised rather than denied.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"severity_override":{"applied":true,"band":"significant","from_band":"significant","reason":"omission_findings[0] is material: the page dates the arrests and recovery to 2022, while Forklog and Revoke.cash report arrests and about $22.2M seized in August 2021. This confirms the significant band implied by the percentage and rules out approval."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}