QUIETLYTIC

Editorial & Corrections Policy

Last Updated: September 2026

1. Editorial Standards

Quietlytic's reporting is grounded in structured data from named sources — vendor advisories, CVE/NVD records, CISA KEV, EPSS, and MITRE ATT&CK — cross-checked before publication. Every factual claim carries an inline, dated citation to its source. We do not fabricate statistics, quotes, indicators of compromise, CVE identifiers, or threat-actor relationships.

2. Attribution Standards

We distinguish, wherever possible, between confirmed fact, source-reported claim, analyst assessment, allegation, and unconfirmed information, and we use cautious attribution language ("reportedly," "according to [source]," "unconfirmed") when evidence is incomplete. We do not state an allegation of malicious or criminal conduct as established fact.

3. Review Process

Articles grounded in ingested data pass through a two-stage editorial review before publication: a drafting pass grounded only in the source dataset, followed by an independent, adversarial review that re-checks every factual claim against the original source data (not the draft's own prose) before the article is published.

4. Submitting a Correction

If you believe an article contains a factual error, please contact us with:

Email: corrections@quietlytic.com

5. How We Handle Corrections

We investigate reported errors against the original source data. Where a correction is warranted, we update the article and, for material factual errors, note that a correction was made. We do not silently alter a published claim's substance without acknowledging the change where the error was material.

6. Legal and Sensitive Content Escalation

Reports alleging defamation, unverified criminal allegations, exposed credentials or secrets, or copyright-ownership disputes are escalated for review rather than resolved through the standard correction process above.