Open sources: what a firm can actually see

A modest definition

Open sources means information that is legally accessible: the press, official publications, registers, reports, public statements, social media. Nothing that requires forcing a door, and nothing bought from a stolen database.

The modesty of the definition is useful: it reminds us that the value lies not in access but in treatment. The same documents are available to everyone. What distinguishes serious work is the ability to date them, cross-check them and draw a reading from them.

What it really allows

Open-source work establishes dated facts: who said what, when, and in front of whom. It maps players and their apparent links, exposes contradictions between public statements and documented decisions, and reconstructs the chronology of a case.

In a sensitive situation, that chronology is often worth more than a long argument. It shows where the turning point sits, and what was said before it.

What it does not allow

A firm does not prove intent. It does not read private conversations. It does not know what is decided in a meeting for which no minutes exist. It replaces neither an investigation, nor a hearing, nor a court ruling.

Confusing analysis with proof is the most common error, and the most expensive: it leads to asserting in public what remains a hypothesis, and to losing in one sentence the credibility built over months.

A method in four steps

Serious work always follows the same order.

Define the question and the limits. What is being sought, for which decision, and what will not be done.

Collect and date. Every document keeps its source, its date and its context.

Cross-check. An isolated fact remains a hypothesis; two independent sources begin to make a fact.

Qualify the degree of certainty. Established, doubtful, unknown: the conclusion always states where it stands.

Limits are set before collection

Privacy, personal data and trade secrets are not settled afterwards, once the files exist. The collection of information about individuals is regulated, and in France the CNIL publishes the applicable rules.

Clean work therefore begins with a list of what will not be done: no bypassing access controls, no borrowed identity, no collection of sensitive data without a legal basis, no use of documents whose origin is not established.

Four questions to ask a provider

Which sources, and how are they kept? An analysis without a trail cannot be verified.

How do you separate a fact from an interpretation? The answer must be concrete, not rhetorical.

What do you refuse to do? A provider with no refusals has no method.

What happens if collection reveals something grave that was not asked for? How such a case is handled must be decided before work starts.

Why it matters in a crisis

In a crisis, information arrives fast and from everywhere. The role of analysis is not to add noise, but to give decisions a stable base: what is established, what is doubtful, what remains unknown.

On this ground, see crisis communications. To prepare a public statement, see the contact page.