Let’s be frank: a lot of people pontificate online about OSINT. The problem? They often focus on collection tools and techniques, completely overlooking the methodologies and analytical techniques that should be employed.
Accumulating data does not mean “doing OSINT.” Rather, it just means taking up disk space.
The real difference is made by you, the OSINT analyst, with your ability to analyse that data in a structured, objective way that is genuinely useful to whoever needs to make a decision.
For this reason, I want to tell you about a document that I believe you should know, even though it was not developed strictly for OSINT: the Intelligence Community Directive 203 (ICD 203), dedicated to “Analytic Standards.”
It is a document from the American Director of National Intelligence and establishes the core principles that must be respected for every intelligence product. Even though we focus on information extracted from open sources, these standards are an extremely useful guide for bringing rigour and a professional standard to our intelligence products.
Let me walk you through the key points, which are essentially all contained in paragraph D.
The Analytic Standards
ICD 203 sets out five fundamental standards that every analysis you produce should respect.
1. Be Objective
Your analysis must be objective. You must be aware of your own biases, of how you reason, and of the fact that the target may be driven by values and worldviews different from your own. Accordingly, adopt techniques that help you identify and mitigate your cognitive biases. Always remember to observe your work from different perspectives and always take into account all information that contradicts your hypothesis.
2. Be Independent of Political Considerations
Your conclusions must not bend to support a particular political idea or viewpoint. Your judgement must not be influenced by pressures or personal preferences.
3. Be Timely
An analysis, even a perfect one, becomes useless if delivered late. You must understand the needs and deadlines of your “client” so that you can provide them with information they can use at the right moment.
4. Draw on All Available Sources
Your analysis must rest on all pertinent information available to you within the time you have. It is your job to identify whether important pieces are missing and to work to find them.
5. Use the Analytic Tradecraft Standards
Your analysis should implement the following nine standards.
The 9 Analytic Tradecraft Standards
Think of these nine points as your mental toolbox.
1. Describe the Quality and Credibility of Your Sources
In every report, you should always indicate where the information comes from and how it was processed. It is essential that you describe how reliable the sources are, specifying aspects such as accuracy, completeness, the possibility that you are being deceived (denial and deception), and the timeliness of the information obtained. You will need to carefully evaluate cases where the source is kept confidential in order to preserve and protect it.
2. Always Specify the Degree of Uncertainty
Your intelligence product must always indicate the degree of uncertainty of your hypotheses.
Let me give you an example: reports often contain ambiguous phrases like “it is possible that” or “it could happen.” There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but bear in mind that for you “possible” might equate to 30%, while for the reader it might mean 60%.
ICD 203 addresses this problem by proposing the use of a standardised vocabulary that expresses the probability of an event. This way, everyone speaks the same language.
Here is the table proposed in the document, to which I have added a column with the Italian terms:
| ITALIAN | English Set 1 | English Set 2 | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quasi nessuna possibilità | almost no chance | remote | 01-05% |
| Altamente improbabile | very unlikely | highly improbable | 05-20% |
| Improbabile | unlikely | improbable (improbably) | 20-45% |
| Probabilità quasi pari | roughly even chance | roughly even odds | 45-55% |
| Probabile | likely | probable (probably) | 55-80% |
| Molto probabile | very likely | highly probable | 80-95% |
| Quasi certo | almost certain(ly) | nearly certain | 95-99% |
Note that the document encourages the analyst not to mix terms from the two English columns. A suggestion: in addition to adopting this writing style, include the table in the section of your report where you indicate the conventions you have adopted, to ensure that the reader also understands what you mean.
3. Distinguish Between Data, Assumptions, and Judgements
In your report, you must clearly separate data, information, and facts from your suppositions (assumptions) and your conclusions (judgements). The hypotheses you make to support your reasoning must be clearly indicated, especially if they are the linchpin of the entire analysis.
4. Analysis of Alternatives (ACH)
When analysing data and information, always evaluate the existence of plausible alternative hypotheses. A methodology that may prove useful is the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH). This technique is vital when there is considerable uncertainty or when an unlikely event could cause serious consequences. It is precisely for this reason that we included the template developed by Pasquale Stirparo in the Argos script.
5. Demonstrate That What You Write Is Relevant and Explain Its Implications
Your analysis must serve a purpose — it must have a precise objective. Focus on the questions your client has asked you. You must provide the reader with a clear picture of what was requested, explaining the implications, the possible threats, and the opportunities you see.
6. Argue Clearly and Logically
The main message must be clearly illustrated in a logical manner right at the beginning. Every conclusion you provide must be supported by pertinent data and sound reasoning. Use simple language that leaves no room for doubt, minimising acronyms and jargon or technical expressions.
7. Explain Changes from Previous Analyses
If you have already produced other documents on the same topic, the new report must state whether your conclusions are the same, whether they have changed, or whether this is the first time you are discussing the subject matter. Explain how new information or different reasoning led you to formulate new conclusions.
8. Be Accurate
Your objective is to provide conclusions that are as precise as possible with the information you have gathered, within the time you had available, and with the intelligence gaps you are aware of. Do not shy away from giving uncomfortable judgements out of fear of being wrong. By accuracy, I mean that whoever reads your intelligence product should be able to understand exactly what you intend to convey.
9. Use Visuals Effectively
Use charts, maps, tables, diagrams, and multimedia content to support your products. They are perfect for making your message clearer, especially when the information concerns relationships between multiple companies and individuals, social networks spread across territories, or across time spans. These concepts are often more comprehensible with an image than with a thousand words.
What Now?
Print out and study the entire ICD 203 carefully (it is only a few pages!).
Keep in mind that adopting these standards in your OSINT work is not a mere exercise in style — it means making a quantum leap in quality.
Try reflecting on these prompts:
- How can you adapt source evaluation (point 1) to the world of social media and the web?
- Which tools can you use to apply ACH analysis (point 4) without going mad?
- How reliable could it be to delegate this operation to an LLM?
- How can you track your judgements over time to understand whether your hypotheses were correct or not (points 7 and 8)?
- Do you use enough graphical tools (point 9) or do you rely too heavily on text?
- What other useful insights could ICD 203 offer you?