shattered.io publishes editorially independent coverage of cryptography, security, privacy, and the cryptography that underlies cryptocurrency. This page lays out the standards we hold ourselves to, the corrections process, and the responsibilities we accept when we publish a claim under a person’s byline.

What we publish

  • Cryptography and protocol analysis — primitive design, hash collisions, signature schemes, post-quantum migration paths.
  • Applied security — TLS, authentication, identity, breach analysis, exploit post-mortems with primary sources.
  • Privacy — VPNs, end-to-end messaging, browser fingerprinting, regulator filings, GDPR/UK GDPR/EU AI Act guidance.
  • Cryptocurrency cryptography — hardware wallets, multisig, MEV, zero-knowledge proofs, mining and consensus protocols.
  • AI / cloud / hardware — comparisons, benchmarks, and pricing tied to verifiable sources.

Sourcing standards

  • Primary sources only. CVE entries, vendor advisories, RFCs, NIST documents, regulator publications, academic papers, official changelogs, and named first-person commentary. We do not cite hot-take aggregators as evidence.
  • Numbers carry attribution. Every breach count, benchmark score, CVSS rating, market figure, or version number cites where it came from — inline, with a working link.
  • No fabricated quotes. Every quotation comes from a named source we link to. We never paraphrase a real person’s words and present them as a quote.
  • Dated claims. Statements about “current” software versions, regulator stances, or exploit prevalence are dated; if the underlying source has not been updated since the headline date on the article, we re-verify before re-promoting.

AI assistance disclosure

shattered.io uses AI tools to assist research, drafting, and translation. AI does not own a byline. Every published article is attributed to a named editor who is responsible for the claims it makes. AI-assisted drafts go through factual review against the sourcing standards above before they are published, and corrections published after the fact retain the original audit trail.

Corrections policy

  • Material errors (incorrect numbers, misattributed quotes, factual misstatements) are corrected in-line, with a dated note at the bottom of the article describing what changed.
  • Typos and broken links are fixed silently.
  • Substantive rewrites that change the article’s conclusion are republished with a new headline and the original URL marked as superseded.
  • Readers can flag corrections at [email protected]. We aim to respond within five working days.

Conflicts and disclosures

  • Editors declare positions in any token, protocol, security vendor, or cloud provider they cover. Disclosures appear in the byline area on relevant articles.
  • shattered.io does not accept payment for editorial coverage, coverage timing, or promotional placement inside the body of an article.
  • Affiliate and partner relationships, where they exist, are disclosed in a labelled block at the foot of the article. We do not stealth-affiliate.
  • Independence of editorial from any commercial relationship is the responsibility of the editor named on the byline.

Contact