Actor mapping
Organisations, people, domains, infrastructure, narratives and visible relationships.
DOSSIER 201
Digital intelligence & OSINT
Turn scattered open sources into a structured, sourced reading that supports decisions.
Operational brief360°observed surface
OSINTopen sources
CLEARreporting standard
Operational brief
See what is public. Understand what matters.
A source can be accurate and still fail to answer the question. He distinguishes the original statement, its reposts, corroborating material and evidence that narrows its scope. The deliverable states what is established, what remains open and which check could move the decision forward.
AR / DOSSIER 201INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS
DOCUMENTED CASE
Six documents do not mean six confirmations
The question is not only how many pages mention it. The analysis needs to establish which records repeat the same statement, what each establishes and whether they refer to the same time.
Entirely fictional teaching example: documents, answers and logs are invented. No client result or real platform test.
The claim under review
The service is already open in three countries.
Statement
D01 announces a future pilot with a condition.
Repost
D02 turns a conditional future into present availability.
Amplification
D03 repeats D02; an extra copy does not resolve the change in meaning.
Cross-check
D04 establishes an administrative status. D05 and D06 describe limited access.
On a small screen, scroll the diagram horizontally. With a keyboard, focus the diagram and use the left and right arrow keys.
Arrows lead from the reused document to its copy: D01 to D02, then D02 to D03. No other reuse relationship is declared. The absence of an arrow does not establish independence.
Open the case documents
| Record | Declared origin | Fictional excerpt | Derivation |
|---|---|---|---|
| D01Launch announcement | Organisation documentation | A pilot is planned in three countries, subject to completion of testing. | Direct document |
| D02Editorial repost | Professional blog | The new service is open in three countries. | Copy of D01 |
| D03Aggregated repost | Aggregator | The service is available in three countries. | Copy of D02 |
| D04Register entry | Public register | The organisation is registered and its status is active. | Direct document |
| D05Pilot documentation | Organisation documentation | Access is restricted to invited participants. | Direct document |
| D06Service status | Organisation documentation | One pilot region is enabled; the others are still being prepared. | Direct document |
Read the reasoning
D01, D02 and D03 form a chain of reuse. Treating them as three independent confirmations would overstate the weight of the original announcement.
D04 answers a different question: the organisation’s administrative existence. It establishes neither service access nor geographic coverage.
D05 and D06 narrow the conclusion. The next useful check is dated evidence of general availability, rather than another copy of the announcement.
Method references : W3C: PROV-O · Content expanded on .
MEASUREMENT WORKSHOP
Six documents do not establish six confirmations
A release repeated by three sites and a register copied by a directory produce six documents but only two provenance chains. Group copies before counting independent confirmations.
AI-generated illustration
Fictional example · no measurement of this site or a client
| Indicator | Calculation or threshold | What the result establishes |
|---|---|---|
| Documents | 6 | Six pages, files or records have been collected. |
| Provenance chains | 2 | Manual grouping identifies only two chains behind the documents. |
| Declared independent chains | 1 | Only one chain is declared independent: corroboration between two independent chains is not established. |
From observation to decision
Name the claim
Break a sentence into testable facts. Two documents may confirm different elements.
Trace the origin
Follow citations, producers and datasets; map repetitions instead of counting domains.
Explain independence
Describe how each chain obtained the information. Distinct origins can still share one initial statement.
Three sites can trace back to one declaration
Nine publications appear across three sites. Provenance review finds one declaration repeated in all nine; no independent collection has been documented.
| Observed unit | Fictional data |
|---|---|
| Publications / sites | 9 / 3 |
| Original declaration found | 1 |
| Independence of confirmations | ? |
How many independent confirmations can be claimed?
Neither nine nor three is justified. One documentary origin was found and its content still needs checking. Unestablished independence remains unknown; site count is not evidence weight.
References and method
02 / Intervention areas
Intervention areas
Strategic monitoring
Weak signals, position changes, publications, recruitment and ecosystem movement.
Digital due diligence
Footprint verification, public consistency, visible history and uncertainty zones.
Narrative analysis
Origin, propagation and transformation of messages across search and social systems.
Reputation monitoring
Track results, citations, profiles, semantic change and emerging friction points.
International sourcing
Multilingual research and source comparison to avoid a single information-space bias.
03 / FIELD NOTES
Intelligence situations
OSINT becomes useful when a decision depends on scattered, ambiguous or excessive information.
01ENGAGEMENT
Qualify a counterpart
Understand the public footprint of a person or organisation before committing.
02MARKET
Map a field
Identify actors, alliances, narratives, offers, infrastructure and repositioning signals.
03CRISIS
Build a timeline
Reconstruct visible facts, their sources and propagation before responding.
04MONITORING
Detect change
Observe a stable perimeter and report only genuinely decision-relevant variations.
04 / OUTPUTS
Reporting formats
Depth follows the risk: from an executive note to fully documented mapping.
Executive brief
A reading available in minutes with possible decisions.
Source journal
URL, date, capture, context, reliability and reuse conditions.
Timeline
Ordered events, contradictions and information gaps.
Relationship map
People, organisations, domains, infrastructure and observable links.
Confidence matrix
Confirmed facts, plausible signals, assumptions and unknowns.
Monitoring plan
Sources, queries, frequency, alert thresholds and owners.
WORKING RECORDS
Make the dossier verifiable
Three practical records connecting diagnosis to a traceable decision.
Collection log
Minimum content : Question, URL, stated author, access date, appropriate copy and collection scope.
Check : Can another analyst recover the trace and understand exclusions?
Corroboration matrix
Minimum content : Link each claim to primary sources, dependent repetition, contradictions and confidence.
Check : Do confirmations come from genuinely separate collection?
Relationship map
Minimum content : Entities, roles, alleged link, source, period and confirmed or hypothetical status.
Check : Could a namesake or former relation be mistaken for a current link?
05 / Method
A discipline of evidence
Every conclusion is linked to a source, a confidence level and an observation date.
- 01Precise initial question
- 02Lawful open-source collection
- 03Qualification and cross-checking
- 04Timeline and relationships
- 05Competing hypotheses
- 06Actionable reporting
- 07Preserve provenance
- 08Reassess conclusions
DECISION CHECKS
Decisions to document
Two checks that change the next decision.
An identity remains ambiguous
Compare name, role, date and organisation before merging two traces. Keep namesakes as separate hypotheses until an independent attribute connects them.
One source seems decisive
Return to the original document, record its date and seek independent confirmation. A second source that merely repeats the first adds no evidence.
Two approaches to distinguish
Two approaches to distinguish
The right method depends on the question and the decision it must inform.
One-off research
Answers a bounded question about an entity, document or event. Define scope, sources, stopping date and coverage limits before collection.
Continuous monitoring
Tracks predefined changes with alert thresholds, frequency, owner and retained observations. It is useful only when a person can act on the signal.
Proposed work plan
Adapt this outline to the agreed scope. It describes a proposed method, not a completed mission, measured result or guaranteed schedule. Record your observations and decisions as checks proceed.
AI-generated illustration
Prepare before starting
A precise question, known entities, a period and authorized public sources. Separate supplied information from hypotheses requiring verification.
Scope the work
Set identifiers, name variants and exclusions. Approve this scope before collection to avoid investigating a namesake.
Apply the method
Log each record with URL, date and useful passage. Group repetitions of one origin before counting confirmations.
Verify and hand over
Link each conclusion to retained records and contradictions. Have identity matches reviewed before handing over findings.
Pause or revision conditions
Stop a lead without authorized grounds or established identity. No result remains a limitation, never proof of nonexistence.
06 / FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Clear answers on scope, limits, methods and engagement conditions.
Is OSINT legal?
The assignment uses accessible sources within a defined scope and applicable law.
Does he provide the sources?
Yes, when they may be disclosed, with date and context.
Can monitoring be continuous?
Yes, using alert thresholds designed to avoid permanent noise.
Does he use private accounts or access?
Not without explicit authorisation. Standard work uses open sources and legitimately provided access.
How does he handle source errors?
Through corroboration, provenance, confidence levels and explicit correction when new evidence appears.
Can he investigate anyone?
No. Purpose, proportionality, applicable law and risk to people are examined before acceptance.
Is OSINT analysis legal evidence?
Not automatically. It may guide and document, but evidential value depends on context and procedure.
Why are several articles not enough to confirm a claim?
They may all repeat one announcement. Trace their origin, compare the cited passage and check whether the records contribute distinct evidence about the question being examined.
Methodological references
Official documents explaining methods, review criteria and their limits. These references do not certify the service or guarantee search rankings.
08 / CONTACT
Open a private channel
State the context and objective. You will receive a clear initial reading.
Turn a need into a defined assignment
A few interventions relevant to this topic. Each amount covers the stated reference scope; the quote confirms priorities and overlapping tasks.
Focused OSINT research
Public sources, identifiers and sourced findings.
Entity : 1 · 6 h
From 480 € excl. VAT / 576 € incl. VAT
Preparation and delivery checks
- What to prepare
- Specific question, known name, country, available identifiers and period to examine.
- Suggested process
- Find primary sources, record relevant passages and explain contradictions and gaps.
- Delivery to agree
- Documented identity, retained sources and unresolved namesakes or evidence gaps.
- Review for this service
- Link the selected identity to identifiers and document unresolved namesakes.
- Scope boundaries
- Research uses public information; no result remains a documented limitation.
Indicative working scope, to confirm in the quotation.
Actor mapping
Public relationships, confidence levels and reporting.
Ecosystem to scope : 1 · 12 h
From 960 € excl. VAT / 1,152 € incl. VAT
Preparation and delivery checks
- What to prepare
- Scope, starting actors, relationship types and cut-off date.
- Suggested process
- Find primary sources, record relevant passages and explain contradictions and gaps.
- Delivery to agree
- Map of publicly documented relationships with supporting records and confidence levels.
- Review for this service
- Link each represented relationship to a document, date and explicit qualification.
- Scope boundaries
- Research uses public information; no result remains a documented limitation.
Indicative working scope, to confirm in the quotation.
Timeline & document analysis
Dates, documents, contradictions and evidence limits.
Event / dossier : 1 · 8 h
From 640 € excl. VAT / 768 € incl. VAT
Preparation and delivery checks
- What to prepare
- Event under study, available records, time zones and period boundaries.
- Suggested process
- Find primary sources, record relevant passages and explain contradictions and gaps.
- Delivery to agree
- Timeline separating events, publications, access dates and unresolved contradictions.
- Review for this service
- Distinguish event, publication and access dates for each selected document.
- Scope boundaries
- Research uses public information; no result remains a documented limitation.
Indicative working scope, to confirm in the quotation.
Prepare and review a service
Use these notes to scope the request and review delivery. The quotation defines the agreed work, volumes and schedule.
OSINT, monitoring & reputation
AI-generated illustration
Answer a bounded question using public sources and verifiable records.
- What to prepare
- Specify the entity, period, territory and decision the research should inform.
- Suggested process
- Find primary sources, record relevant passages and explain contradictions and gaps.
- Delivery to agree
- Agree a sourced summary, a record of documents and limits on conclusions.
- Scope boundaries
- Research uses public information; no result remains a documented limitation.
Acceptance check to prepare
For mapped analysis, retain geometry type, reference version and entity identifier. Separate holes, multipolygon parts and distinct objects before counting places or interpreting absence.
See scope and pricingRelated checks
DEEPER READING / PRACTICE
Start with a question before collecting information
A corpus of public sources accumulates without exploitable conclusion. Research gains accuracy when each document is linked to a question, a hypothesis and a verification scope.
Updated on .
Priority checks
Identify entities, periods, territories and facts sought. Identify possible primary sources, secondary repetitions and information that cannot be established with the available corpus.
Interpretation pitfalls
Several publications may have the same origin. Therefore, the number of links does not automatically measure the solidity of a conclusion or the independence of testimony.
Working record to retain
The research file connects question, source, observation, hypothesis and uncertainty. The presentation of the results indicates what is established, what remains plausible and the next verification is useful.
Establish independent confirmation
Trace links, quotations and dates to their origin. Several pages repeating one announcement do not provide separate documentary confirmation.
For identity, compare stable identifiers and compatible dates. Retain competing hypotheses when a name, photograph or old address cannot distinguish the entities.
EXAMPLE / READING THE NUMBERS
Count origins rather than repetitions
Fictional data illustrating the method; not client results or measurements of this website.
| Observation | Count | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Articles consulted | 6 | 6 publications identified. |
| Articles repeating one release | 5 | 5 repetitions: one origin. |
| Other documentary origin | 1 | 1 publication based on a distinct record. |
Show the interpretation limit
What these numbers do not prove
Six articles may represent only two origins. Two origins alone establish neither independence nor the truth of every claim: check their records and methods.