A finding is only worth what its record can prove.
Explore the intelligence process, inspect a clearly labelled synthetic assessment, and understand how evidence is graded and verified.
Beyond the deliverable
You are commissioning intelligence. Not buying a document.
A Blackout Intelligence engagement begins with your objectives. Depending on the agreed scope, it can involve lawful collection, identity and ownership verification, relationship mapping, corroboration, risk analysis, human review and practical recommendations. The written assessment is one expression of that work — not the service itself.
Explore our enhanced due diligence reporting standard
This 32-page synthetic demonstration illustrates decision-first reporting, source reliability grading, beneficial ownership analysis, relationship mapping, evidence gaps and actionable recommendations. Every subject and finding is fictional. It is not a live client case or a promise that every engagement includes every capability.
Demonstration report · 32 pages
Enhanced Due Diligence
Synthetic demonstration of analytical depth, source discipline and decision support. The downloadable PDF will be enabled once the supplied asset is installed in the public samples directory.
The difference
Everyone shows you a confidence score.
Ask where the number came from.
Blackout grades every finding to NATO STANAG 2511 and ICD 203 — the standards real intelligence services are held to. Source reliability A–F. Information credibility 1–6. Graded independently, because they are independent.
Every other platform
94%
confident
- Confident based on which source?
- Corroborated, or a single reading?
- What did they fail to reach?
Blackout
OFAC sanctions screening — DESIGNATED
This address is designated: YAN, Xiaobing
- Programme
- SDNTK
- Source grade
- A · Completely reliable
- Credibility
- 1 · Confirmed by other sources
Almost certain (96–100%), with high confidence in the sourcing — Admiralty A1.
Two sources didn't answer — and we tell you which. “Six of twelve refused” is a different finding from “nothing found”.
Worked example of the output format. Not a real subject, and not a case we have worked.
Nobody else asks this
What should be here — and isn't?
Real identities accrete. They are old, uneven and messy — abandoned accounts, a breach from 2013, archived pages nobody meant to keep.
Constructed ones are manufactured in a window. Recent. Uniform. Tidy. Conspicuously free of a decade's debris.
Legend Analysis reads the gaps, not just the hits — and shows the evidence for authenticity alongside the doubts.
Legend analysis
Strong constructed-identity indicators
Worked example of the output format — not a real subject.
No history predating the last 12 months
Oldest verifiable record is 40 days old
Origin dates tightly clustered
4 records all originate within 6 days of each other
Same handle claimed across 11 platforms
Uniformity at scale suggests a single reservation pass
Graded Admiralty D — an indicator, never a conclusion. A new business is legitimately new, and the panel says so.
The register
221 collectors. Every one graded.
Not a logo wall. Grade A is reserved for the body that issues the fact — being excellent isn't enough. Every grade carries a written rationale you're invited to challenge.
Issuing authority
OFAC · UK Sanctions List · Companies House · The Gazette · SEC
Direct records
DNS · Certificate Transparency · Wikidata · recorded street crime
Scanning & aggregation
Shodan · breach corpora · Wayback · ADS-B receiver networks
Derived & inferred
Behavioural profiling · lookalike generation
Verifiable evidence
Don’t take our word for it. Check it.
Every report this platform produces carries a cryptographic seal over its findings. The person who needs to trust it — a bank, a regulator, the other side of a dispute — can verify it here with no account, no key and no contact with us.
Below is a real seal, issued by the same code that seals a customer’s findings. Verify it, then alter a value and verify again.
A seal proves a document has not changed since it was issued. It does not, and cannot, prove the findings are correct — that is what the source grading is for.
Free, no card
Three modules that cost nothing, and are not a demo
Most platforms in this field give you a locked screenshot and ask for a card. These run in full, against live sources, on a free account — because the fastest way to show the paid tiers are worth paying for is to let you check that the free ones work.
Username Intelligence
97 platforms
One handle, swept across development, social, creative, gaming, music, forum and security platforms in about six seconds.
Verified against a control handle that exists nowhere. Sites that could not tell a real account from an invented one were removed rather than counted.
IP Intelligence
Ports, CVEs, Tor, blocklists
Geolocation, ASN and netblock owner, the abuse contact to serve notice on, exposed services and known vulnerabilities, Tor exit status and screening across three aggregate threat lists.
“Not listed” is only said when every list actually answered. If one is unreachable the result reads inconclusive, because an absence you did not check is not an absence.
Live Operations
The world, right now
Seismic events, aircraft in the air, wildfires, storms, volcanoes, floods and sea ice — plotted live and refreshed continuously.
A feed that stops answering is named on the board. A quiet map is never allowed to look like a quiet world.
All three draw on the same 221 graded collectors the paid tiers use. The difference is how many subjects you can run, not how good the answer is.
See the plansDo not take the demonstration for it.
Two of these surfaces are open to anyone with no account at all. Go and run them against something you already know the answer to — that is the only test of this page worth anything.