Evidence strength
High Primary or official source — vendor advisory, regulator, statement from the affected organisation, CVE record. Named specifics.
Medium Credible reporting citing named sources, but not primary. Details incomplete or second-hand.
Low Single unconfirmed report, anonymous sources, attacker claims, or commentary without original findings.
This rates how well the reported fact is sourced — not how severe the incident is, and not our confidence in the assessment.
How it was checked
Automated Generated by our AI system from the linked report.
Every Radar item carries this badge, because it is true of every item. We do not read the Radar item by item before it is published; we check the ones our rules hold back — an item naming a person in connection with alleged wrongdoing, identifying a private victim, or making a claim that would seriously harm someone if it were wrong. Those are not published until a member of our team has read the source. Nothing on the item says who did that, because a badge on a handful of items would imply a grade of accuracy the others cannot have. Our own writing is in Insights, and it carries a name.
Priority
Priority is reading order for South African leadership — not the severity of the incident. An item becomes Priority 1 through a direct South African link, an effect on critical infrastructure, or an actively exploited vulnerability. A severe global incident with no local link can sit at Priority 2, and a smaller local one can sit at Priority 1.
If you need technical severity, read the reported fact and the original source. We do not publish a severity rating.
The three layers
Reported fact is documented in the source. Assessment is our inference. Recommended next step is a suggestion. They are never merged.