Data Sources & Methodology
Why Data Sources and Methodology Matter
Security product evaluations are only as reliable as the data and methods behind them.At ProSecurityReviews, transparency is a core principle. This page explains where our data comes from, how it is processed, and how evaluation decisions are made — so users can understand not just what we conclude, but why.
Primary Data Sources
ProSecurityReviews relies primarily on first-party technical documentation published by manufacturers.Our core data sources include:• Official product datasheets• Manufacturer product manuals• Technical whitepapers and specification sheets• Firmware feature documentation and release notesThese sources are used because they provide defined technical parameters, consistent terminology, and verifiable specifications.We do not rely on reseller descriptions, marketing landing pages, or third-party rewritten specifications as primary data sources.
Supplementary Information Sources
To complement official documentation, we may reference:• Publicly available standards documentation• Industry-recognized protocol specifications• Aggregated user feedback from reputable platformsSupplementary sources are used for context and validation, not as replacements for primary technical data.
Data Extraction and Normalization
Manufacturer documentation varies significantly in structure, terminology, and completeness.To enable fair comparison, all product data undergoes a normalization process, which includes:• Standardizing units of measurement• Aligning terminology across brands• Mapping similar features under unified definitions• Separating measurable parameters from descriptive languageThis process ensures that equivalent capabilities are evaluated consistently, even when described differently by manufacturers.
Handling Missing or Undisclosed Specifications
Not all manufacturers disclose the same level of technical detail.When specifications are missing or unclear:• No assumptions are made• Missing data is treated neutrally• Products are not penalized or rewarded based on undisclosed claimsIf a specification cannot be verified, it is excluded from scoring.
Evaluation Framework Overview
Each product is evaluated using a structured, multi-dimensional framework.Key characteristics of the framework include:• 10 primary evaluation dimensions• 80–100 extracted technical parameters per product• 30–50 selected key indicators used for scoringDimensions represent the full operational profile of a security camera, including image performance, analytics, networking, reliability, security, and deployment considerations.
Scoring Methodology
Selected indicators contribute to dimension-level scores, which are normalized to maintain balance across product categories.Core scoring principles:• No single parameter dominates the overall score• Scores reflect technical capability, not popularity or pricing• Feature presence alone does not guarantee higher scores• Category-specific logic prevents unfair comparisonThe final score supports structured comparison, not to declare a universal “best” product.
Role of User Feedback in Methodology
User feedback is incorporated as a qualitative validation layer.Aggregated user reviews help us:• Confirm real-world consistency of documented features• Identify recurring stability or usability issues• Highlight gaps between specifications and practical performanceUser feedback does not directly alter technical scores, but influences written reviews, strengths and limitations summaries, and contextual recommendations.
Methodology Updates and Versioning
Technology evolves, and evaluation frameworks must evolve with it.ProSecurityReviews periodically reviews and updates its methodology to reflect:• New imaging or analytics technologies• Changes in industry standards• Consistent long-term user feedback patternsWhen methodology changes occur:• Updates are applied consistently across affected products• Historical comparisons are preserved where possible• Significant changes are documented transparently
Independence and Conflict of Interest Policy
ProSecurityReviews operates independently.• We do not accept paid influence on evaluation outcomes• Commercial relationships do not affect scoring logic• Manufacturers cannot request score adjustmentsOur methodology is designed to remain stable regardless of commercial considerations.
Limitations and Scope
While we aim for comprehensive coverage, our methodology has defined boundaries.ProSecurityReviews does not:• Perform on-site installation testing• Modify or reverse-engineer hardware• Guarantee performance in every deployment environmentEvaluations are based on documented capabilities and aggregated real-world feedback, not individual installation quality or user skill.
How This Methodology Supports Our Tools
This methodology underpins all core features of ProSecurityReviews, including:• Individual product reviews• Side-by-side product comparisons• Search and filtering tools• The AI Security AdvisorBy grounding every tool in a consistent data framework, recommendations and comparisons remain transparent and explainable.
Our Commitment to Transparency
Trust requires clarity.By openly documenting our data sources and evaluation methods, ProSecurityReviews aims to provide users with confidence — not just in our conclusions, but in the process behind them.To understand how this methodology is applied in practice, please refer to How We Evaluate Security Systems.