The score is not the valuable part; the reason for it is. Every point needs a rationale you can show.
Assigning a score to a finding is easy; defending it is hard. When an analyst asks "why 82?" and the answer is "the model said so", the score stops being used.
Three rules
- Decompose the contribution — show separately how much each component added: asset criticality, exposure, actor interest, confidence.
- Cite the source — link each component to the raw record it rests on, and make that record openable.
- Track the change — when the score moves, record what moved. Not "61 yesterday, 82 today", but "the actor-interest component rose on a new forum record".
A band, not a threshold
A single number implies false precision. Presenting a range is more honest: a record in the "high" band is shown together with where in the band it sits.
Feedback
When an analyst raises or lowers a score, the reason is recorded. Those records are the input to the next version of the model; without them the score repeats its own mistakes.
