What is verifiable, and what we will not claim

Independence from vendors and platforms

We sell no platform and take no commission on the ones you use or that we might mention. We are paid solely for the technical work carried out.

That has a practical consequence: when we say replacing a tool is unnecessary — which is usually the case — we lose nothing by saying it. And when it genuinely is necessary, we have no reason to prefer one supplier over another.

What we refuse to claim

• •We do not pronounce on your regulatory obligations. Interpreting the rules is for your legal or tax advisers, not for us.
• •We do not guarantee that a flow complies with a regulation: we guarantee that it works technically against a given specification.
• •We do not assert that a problem will be solved before diagnosing it. Until the cause is identified, any quote is a guess.
• •We do not publish figures we have not measured or that the client has not confirmed.

Editorial standards for our guides

• •The guides explain technical mechanics; they are neither legal nor tax advice.
• •Where a statement depends on jurisdiction, on the channel or on a partner’s specification, the text says so rather than asserting a universal rule.
• •Every guide carries a visible update date and is corrected when practice contradicts it.
• •No guide is written to rank for a keyword: they start from questions actually asked during engagements.

How your data is handled during an engagement

• •We ask for the minimum necessary: the symptom and one rejected message are usually enough for the first conversation.
• •For the analysis, read access to the messages and exchange logs is enough in most cases. We state exactly what we need, and why.
• •Documents and extracts shared are used solely for the engagement and deleted at its end, unless the contract requires otherwise.
• •We ask you to limit the personal data you send and to pseudonymise it where possible.

What you can verify without us

The technical guides on this site are checkable: the concepts described — content profiles, technical acknowledgements, the respective roles of a network and an access point — are publicly documented by the bodies that define them.

That is deliberate. An explanation a reader can confirm against an independent source is the only kind of claim worth anything before a first engagement.

How to assess us concretely

The fastest way is still to put a real problem in front of us. A short conversation is usually enough to see whether we know what we are talking about — and if the subject is outside our field, we say so at that point.