Is this a system record, an alert, an intelligence report or somebody’s summary?¶
The label matters because each source supports a different conclusion.
| Source | What it may establish | What it is not by itself |
|---|---|---|
| System record | What a system recorded, with its fields and timestamp | Proof that the system was configured or interpreted correctly |
| Alert | That a rule, threshold or model triggered | Proof that the event was criminal or that a person caused it |
| Intelligence report | An assessment combining information | The underlying original records |
| Human summary | What somebody says the records showed | A substitute for the complete source context |
Preserve the chain back to source¶
Keep the alert or report because it explains why attention was drawn to the event. Then identify the producing system, original fields, time zone, extraction method and any transformations or rounding. Seek the earliest available record and retain the summary alongside it.
Safe conclusions¶
You may be able to say that a system recorded an address, a rule classified activity as suspicious, or an analyst assessed the information. Those statements are not interchangeable, and none alone identifies the person responsible.
The point to remember
Preserve both the summary and the source, but do not let a shortened description silently become stronger than the record it came from.