Editorial method
Two files. One standard of proof.
The subject’s responsibility model decides the framework; evidence quality decides whether a finding can be printed.
Fix the object
Name the exact product, version, market and responsible party before research begins.
Open ten claim files
At minimum, test scope, control, security, regulation, cost, access, operation, privacy, support and change history as separate claim → evidence → gap chains.
Apply stop gates
Identity, custody or key-control gaps can stop a verdict rather than dilute a score.
Challenge the draft
Check claim-to-source fit, seek relevant right of reply, record conflicts and require a second editorial review for material conclusions.
Run decision scenarios
Declare market, account, version, device, asset, amount, time, steps and retained outputs; publish scenario results with full parameters.
Publish the limits
Keep dates, jurisdictions, unanswered questions and conflicts next to the conclusion, then mirror that same record in public machine endpoints.
Maintain the record
Re-check changing facts against primary sources, date every update and distinguish a correction from a new product state.