Emily Thompson Persona and stratixwealth.com

Emily Thompson Persona and stratixwealth.com

Examining a Synthetic Digital Footprint and Observations Based on Publicly Available Information

Examining a Synthetic Digital Footprint and Observations Based on Publicly Available Information

This report has been prepared by deleteme.com, in collaboration with CyberDeleteme, as part of their ongoing work in digital forensics, open-source intelligence (OSINT), cyber-risk assessment, and online identity verification.

Deleteme.com and CyberDeleteme specialise in:

  • Digital footprint and online exposure analysis

  • OSINT-based cyber and reputational investigations

  • Dark Web scanning

  • Domain, infrastructure, and hosting-level forensic analysis

  • Data-broker intelligence and privacy risk mitigation

This report was produced using lawful, non-intrusive investigative techniques, relying exclusively on publicly accessible information and established OSINT methodologies. No private, confidential, hacked, leaked, or otherwise non-public data sources were accessed or used at any stage of the investigation.

Scope of the Investigation

This document presents a consolidated digital forensic and OSINT investigation into:

  1. The online persona known as “Emily Thompson”, operating on X (formerly Twitter) under the handle @EmilyTanalyst; and

  2. The operational, technical, and narrative linkage between the domains stratixwealth.com and stratixsolutions.us, including their use of synthetic personas, shared infrastructure, and coordinated digital behavior.

All findings are derived exclusively from publicly available sources, including but not limited to DNS analysis, WHOIS records, certificate transparency logs, hosting attribution, mail-security configuration review, and reverse-image correlation.

This report constitutes only a summary of a comprehensive investigation, including digital footprint analysis and dark-web searches relating to the examined subjects.
It presents selected findings derived from lawful OSINT methodologies and public-source intelligence. The full investigation and supporting technical evidence are available upon request.

 

Objective

The objective of this report is to document observable digital patterns, technical correlations, and structural inconsistencies relevant to:

  • Verification and enhanced due diligence

  • Journalistic and investigative research

  • Platform integrity and trust assessment

  • Regulatory and compliance-oriented risk analysis

The analysis is descriptive and evidence-based, not accusatory.

Important Clarification

This report makes no allegation of criminal activity and does not assert intent, motive, or illegality. Its conclusions are strictly descriptive, documenting observable inconsistencies, correlations, and risk indicators relevant to due diligence, journalistic review, regulatory assessment, and platform trust evaluation.

Key Findings (High-Confidence)

  • The “Emily Thompson” identity shows multiple high-confidence indicators of a synthetic or misattributed persona, centered around a single reused female profile image appearing across unrelated identities and industries.

  • The same facial image is linked to political commentary, lifestyle content, food publishing, gambling promotion, and corporate biographies, with no consistent or verifiable real-world footprint.

  • stratixwealth.com and stratixsolutions.us exhibit strong operational overlap, including shared hosting ecosystem signals, DNS workflow similarities, coordinated infrastructure behavior, and asymmetric transparency.

  • Synthetic executive personas, including the extensively reused “Franklin Grant” image, are employed to provide apparent legitimacy to Stratix-branded sites.

  • The combined pattern is not consistent with independent, unrelated operations and instead reflects a coordinated digital footprint.
     

This report makes no allegation of criminal activity. Its conclusions are descriptive, documenting observable inconsistencies, correlations, and risk indicators relevant to due diligence, journalistic review, regulatory assessment, and platform trust evaluation.

About Emily Thomson

What the account claims to be
The persona “Emily Thompson” presents herself as an analyst of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, with articles allegedly published on Activist Post, The Published Reporter, and TheThinkingConservative.com, currently remove her photo.

What is observed
High-confidence indicators show a probable misattribution or synthetic persona pattern, built around a single recurring female profile photograph reused across multiple unrelated identities and content verticals (political analyst ↔ lifestyle/food author ↔ gambling/casino author). No consistent, verifiable real-world footprint has been identified that substantiates the claimed media presence or professional authority.

Multiple Profiles, One Face

The same photograph attributed to “Emily Thompson” appears across a wide range of online roles, including:

  • A political analyst account commenting on Cyprus politics

  • Lifestyle and personal social-media profiles

  • Food and recipe content pages

  • Gambling and betting-related promotional content

  • Corporate or executive-style biography pages

These profiles present fundamentally different professional identities that do not cohere or appear credible. There is no consistent employment history, academic background, institutional affiliation, or long-term publishing record linking these personas together. Several online profiles using the name “Emily Thompson” have been identified across public platforms. These profiles display variations in role, content focus, and digital representation.

This report has been prepared by deleteme.com, in collaboration with CyberDeleteme, as part of their ongoing work in digital forensics, open-source intelligence (OSINT), cyber-risk assessment, and online identity verification.

Deleteme.com and CyberDeleteme specialise in:

  • Digital footprint and online exposure analysis

  • OSINT-based cyber and reputational investigations

  • Dark Web scanning

  • Domain, infrastructure, and hosting-level forensic analysis

  • Data-broker intelligence and privacy risk mitigation

This report was produced using lawful, non-intrusive investigative techniques, relying exclusively on publicly accessible information and established OSINT methodologies. No private, confidential, hacked, leaked, or otherwise non-public data sources were accessed or used at any stage of the investigation.

Scope of the Investigation

This document presents a consolidated digital forensic and OSINT investigation into:

  1. The online persona known as “Emily Thompson”, operating on X (formerly Twitter) under the handle @EmilyTanalyst; and

  2. The operational, technical, and narrative linkage between the domains stratixwealth.com and stratixsolutions.us, including their use of synthetic personas, shared infrastructure, and coordinated digital behavior.

All findings are derived exclusively from publicly available sources, including but not limited to DNS analysis, WHOIS records, certificate transparency logs, hosting attribution, mail-security configuration review, and reverse-image correlation.

This report constitutes only a summary of a comprehensive investigation, including digital footprint analysis and dark-web searches relating to the examined subjects.
It presents selected findings derived from lawful OSINT methodologies and public-source intelligence. The full investigation and supporting technical evidence are available upon request.

 

Objective

The objective of this report is to document observable digital patterns, technical correlations, and structural inconsistencies relevant to:

  • Verification and enhanced due diligence

  • Journalistic and investigative research

  • Platform integrity and trust assessment

  • Regulatory and compliance-oriented risk analysis

The analysis is descriptive and evidence-based, not accusatory.

Important Clarification

This report makes no allegation of criminal activity and does not assert intent, motive, or illegality. Its conclusions are strictly descriptive, documenting observable inconsistencies, correlations, and risk indicators relevant to due diligence, journalistic review, regulatory assessment, and platform trust evaluation.

Key Findings (High-Confidence)

  • The “Emily Thompson” identity shows multiple high-confidence indicators of a synthetic or misattributed persona, centered around a single reused female profile image appearing across unrelated identities and industries.

  • The same facial image is linked to political commentary, lifestyle content, food publishing, gambling promotion, and corporate biographies, with no consistent or verifiable real-world footprint.

  • stratixwealth.com and stratixsolutions.us exhibit strong operational overlap, including shared hosting ecosystem signals, DNS workflow similarities, coordinated infrastructure behavior, and asymmetric transparency.

  • Synthetic executive personas, including the extensively reused “Franklin Grant” image, are employed to provide apparent legitimacy to Stratix-branded sites.

  • The combined pattern is not consistent with independent, unrelated operations and instead reflects a coordinated digital footprint.
     

This report makes no allegation of criminal activity. Its conclusions are descriptive, documenting observable inconsistencies, correlations, and risk indicators relevant to due diligence, journalistic review, regulatory assessment, and platform trust evaluation.

About Emily Thomson

What the account claims to be
The persona “Emily Thompson” presents herself as an analyst of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, with articles allegedly published on Activist Post, The Published Reporter, and TheThinkingConservative.com, currently remove her photo.

What is observed
High-confidence indicators show a probable misattribution or synthetic persona pattern, built around a single recurring female profile photograph reused across multiple unrelated identities and content verticals (political analyst ↔ lifestyle/food author ↔ gambling/casino author). No consistent, verifiable real-world footprint has been identified that substantiates the claimed media presence or professional authority.

Multiple Profiles, One Face

The same photograph attributed to “Emily Thompson” appears across a wide range of online roles, including:

  • A political analyst account commenting on Cyprus politics

  • Lifestyle and personal social-media profiles

  • Food and recipe content pages

  • Gambling and betting-related promotional content

  • Corporate or executive-style biography pages

These profiles present fundamentally different professional identities that do not cohere or appear credible. There is no consistent employment history, academic background, institutional affiliation, or long-term publishing record linking these personas together. Several online profiles using the name “Emily Thompson” have been identified across public platforms. These profiles display variations in role, content focus, and digital representation.

Indicators of a Synthetic Persona

From an OSINT (open-source intelligence) perspective, several red flags stand out:

  • Image reuse: The same facial image is reused across unrelated platforms and industries

  • Cross-industry identity collision: Political analysis, lifestyle influencing, gambling promotion, and corporate leadership are presented as if they belong to one person

  • Fragmented digital trails: Each profile exists in isolation, with no corroborating real-world footprint

  • Absence of verification: No independent evidence confirms the existence of a real person matching the claimed professional authority

Such patterns are inconsistent with how real individuals build digital identities, especially those claiming public or professional influence.

Is Emily Thompson a Real Person?

At present, there is no publicly verifiable evidence that “Emily Thompson,” as presented across these profiles, corresponds to a real, identifiable individual. This does not mean that a person does not exist behind one or more of the accounts; however, based strictly on publicly available information, the identity appears unverified and unsupported by independent confirmation. 

Analysts note that this structure closely resembles synthetic persona deployment, a practice in which stock or scraped images are reused to create multiple online characters for narrative amplification, influence operations, marketing manipulation, or short-lived digital projects.

A Necessary Distinction

It is important to emphasize that this assessment:

  • Relies only on publicly available sources

  • Makes no allegation of criminal activity

  • Does not claim to identify a real individual

  • Documents observable digital inconsistencies and patterns

The conclusion is therefore descriptive, not accusatory.

Conclusion

The “Emily Thompson” identity, as it currently exists online, functions less like a coherent human profile and more like a modular digital construct—one image reused across multiple, incompatible roles without a verifiable real-world anchor. Until independent confirmation emerges, the persona should be treated as unverified.

In an era of increasing synthetic identities and online manipulation, such cases highlight the importance of critical evaluation, transparency, and verification before accepting digital personas at face value.

Investigating the Operational Link Between stratixsolutions.us and stratixwealth.com

How shared infrastructure, DNS behavior, and hosting patterns reveal a coordinated digital footprint

In an era where digital presence is often used to establish credibility—particularly in consulting and wealth-related services—the underlying technical infrastructure of websites can reveal relationships that are not immediately visible on the surface. A forensic analysis of stratixsolutions.us and stratixwealth.com shows multiple overlapping operational characteristics that strongly indicate affiliation or coordinated control.

This article summarizes the key technical findings that connect the two domains.

1. Shared Hosting Ecosystem (Hostinger)

Both domains resolve, directly or indirectly, within the Hostinger hosting ecosystem.

  • stratixwealth.com resolves to the IP address 141.136.33.240, which belongs to Hostinger International Limited(ASN AS47583).

  • stratixsolutions.us uses Hostinger mail servers (mx1.hostinger.com, mx2.hostinger.com) and Hostinger-specific CDN naming (hstgr), alongside IP rotation patterns consistent with Hostinger shared hosting.

  • Both domains use IPv6 addresses within the 2a02:4780:: allocation family, a range associated with Hostinger infrastructure.

Why this matters:
Independent companies can coincidentally use the same provider, but when combined with additional shared indicators (DNS strategy, mail behavior, and operational patterns), this becomes a strong affiliation signal.

2. DNS Workflow Parallels

Both domains exhibit the same DNS parking workflow:

  • Nameservers ns1.dns-parking.com and ns2.dns-parking.com appear in observed DNS data for both domains.

  • While stratixwealth.com is registered via GoDaddy and currently uses domaincontrol.com nameservers in WHOIS, historical and live DNS observations show dns-parking infrastructure in use.

Why this matters:
DNS parking is commonly used during development, migration, or controlled redirection. Seeing the same DNS parking pattern across multiple domains is a recognized indicator of coordinated administration.

3. WHOIS Transparency vs Privacy Shielding

The two domains differ in how ownership is presented—but this difference itself is telling.

stratixsolutions.us

  • WHOIS data identifies a named individual and company:

    • Registrant: Sandra Negrete

    • Organization: Strategyx LLC

    • Control email: info@pmconsultingsolutions.com

  • This establishes direct, attributable control.

 

stratixwealth.com

  • WHOIS uses Domains By Proxy (GoDaddy), fully masking the registrant.

  • Domain status flags (clientTransferProhibited, clientUpdateProhibited, etc.) are set, limiting visibility and changes.

Screenshot of the page from 2023 of stratixwealth.com

Why this matters:
It is common in multi-asset operations for one domain to be openly registered while another—often the more sensitive or higher-risk brand—is privacy-shielded. This asymmetry increases, rather than reduces, the likelihood of common control.

4. Mail Infrastructure: Selective Hardening

Email configuration further differentiates the domains while reinforcing the affiliation hypothesis.

  • stratixsolutions.us

    • Uses Hostinger mail servers

    • DMARC policy set to p=none

    • No MTA-STS enforcement
      → Higher susceptibility to email spoofing

  • stratixwealth.com

    • Uses ProtonMail

    • DMARC policy set to p=quarantine

    • Privacy-focused mail posture

Why this matters:
This pattern, basic mail configuration on one domain and hardened, privacy-focused email on another, is consistent with selective risk management by a single operator or closely coordinated entities.

5. Shared Hosting Neighborhood Risk

Reverse-IP analysis of 141.136.33.240 (used by stratixwealth.com) shows it is co-hosted with dozens of unrelated domains, including:

  • Financial-themed sites

  • Crypto and trading portals

  • Temporary email services

  • Generic consulting and e-commerce brands

Why this matters:
Shared hosting environments with high domain churn are incompatible with claims of strong operational independence or institutional-grade infrastructure, particularly for wealth or finance-branded entities.

6. Certificate and Platform Change Timeline

Certificate Transparency (CRT) logs show:

  • Multiple certificate issuers over time (Let’s Encrypt, Google Trust Services, GoDaddy G2)

  • Frequent renewals and changes between 2023–2026

Why this matters:
This indicates active management and platform adjustments, not dormant or abandoned domains, supporting the conclusion of ongoing coordinated operation.

Conclusion: A High-Confidence Operational Link

While stratixsolutions.us and stratixwealth.com do not publicly declare a relationship, forensic evidence shows:

  • Shared hosting ecosystem (Hostinger / AS47583)

  • Overlapping DNS parking workflows

  • Coordinated infrastructure behavior

  • Asymmetric transparency (open WHOIS vs privacy proxy)

  • Selective security hardening

  • Shared hosting risk profile

Taken together, these findings cannot be explained by coincidence alone.
From a technical, investigative, and due diligence perspective, the two domains should be treated as affiliated or operationally coordinated unless proven otherwise by independent infrastructure, ownership disclosure, and security segregation.

Editorial Note

All findings in this article are derived from publicly available technical data (DNS, WHOIS, Certificate Transparency logs, and mail security records). No inference is made beyond what the evidence supports.

Same Face, Hundreds of Profiles: How Two “Stratix” Sites Share a Synthetic Executive Persona

A growing body of open-source intelligence (OSINT) evidence indicates that the websites StratixSolutions.us and beratung.vamtam.com rely on the same fabricated executive persona—  a figure presented as “Franklin Grant  whose profile image has now been traced to more than 700 unrelated websites and profiles worldwide, according to cyber-forensic analysis conducted by CyberDeleteme.

The “Franklin Grant” Pattern

On StratixSolutions.us, “Franklin Grant” is introduced as a senior executive or founder, complete with a professional portrait and corporate biography. However, reverse-image correlation and persona-tracking tools reveal that the exact same photograph appears across hundreds of unrelated consulting, finance, lifestyle, demo, and template websites — each time under different names, titles, and jurisdictions.

Investigators describe this as a textbook case of synthetic leadership: a non-existent executive identity constructed using stock imagery and generic biographies to create the appearance of corporate legitimacy.

Notably, the same image appears within theBeratung demo ecosystem of the VamTam WordPress theme, hosted at beratung.vamtam.com — a public template showcase intended to demonstrate how a consulting firm websitemightlook. While VamTam is not accused of owning or operating StratixSolutions.us, the overlap strongly suggeststemplate-driven site construction combined with recycled persona assets.

Why this matters:
It is common in multi-asset operations for one domain to be openly registered while another—often the more sensitive or higher-risk brand—is privacy-shielded. This asymmetry increases, rather than reduces, the likelihood of common control.

4. Mail Infrastructure: Selective Hardening

Email configuration further differentiates the domains while reinforcing the affiliation hypothesis.

  • stratixsolutions.us

    • Uses Hostinger mail servers

    • DMARC policy set to p=none

    • No MTA-STS enforcement
      → Higher susceptibility to email spoofing

  • stratixwealth.com

    • Uses ProtonMail

    • DMARC policy set to p=quarantine

    • Privacy-focused mail posture

Why this matters:
This pattern, basic mail configuration on one domain and hardened, privacy-focused email on another, is consistent with selective risk management by a single operator or closely coordinated entities.

5. Shared Hosting Neighborhood Risk

Reverse-IP analysis of 141.136.33.240 (used by stratixwealth.com) shows it is co-hosted with dozens of unrelated domains, including:

  • Financial-themed sites

  • Crypto and trading portals

  • Temporary email services

  • Generic consulting and e-commerce brands

Why this matters:
Shared hosting environments with high domain churn are incompatible with claims of strong operational independence or institutional-grade infrastructure, particularly for wealth or finance-branded entities.

6. Certificate and Platform Change Timeline

Certificate Transparency (CRT) logs show:

  • Multiple certificate issuers over time (Let’s Encrypt, Google Trust Services, GoDaddy G2)

  • Frequent renewals and changes between 2023–2026

Why this matters:
This indicates active management and platform adjustments, not dormant or abandoned domains, supporting the conclusion of ongoing coordinated operation.

Conclusion: A High-Confidence Operational Link

While stratixsolutions.us and stratixwealth.com do not publicly declare a relationship, forensic evidence shows:

  • Shared hosting ecosystem (Hostinger / AS47583)

  • Overlapping DNS parking workflows

  • Coordinated infrastructure behavior

  • Asymmetric transparency (open WHOIS vs privacy proxy)

  • Selective security hardening

  • Shared hosting risk profile

Taken together, these findings cannot be explained by coincidence alone.
From a technical, investigative, and due diligence perspective, the two domains should be treated as affiliated or operationally coordinated unless proven otherwise by independent infrastructure, ownership disclosure, and security segregation.

Editorial Note

All findings in this article are derived from publicly available technical data (DNS, WHOIS, Certificate Transparency logs, and mail security records). No inference is made beyond what the evidence supports.

Same Face, Hundreds of Profiles: How Two “Stratix” Sites Share a Synthetic Executive Persona

A growing body of open-source intelligence (OSINT) evidence indicates that the websites StratixSolutions.us and beratung.vamtam.com rely on the same fabricated executive persona—  a figure presented as “Franklin Grant  whose profile image has now been traced to more than 700 unrelated websites and profiles worldwide, according to cyber-forensic analysis conducted by CyberDeleteme.

The “Franklin Grant” Pattern

On StratixSolutions.us, “Franklin Grant” is introduced as a senior executive or founder, complete with a professional portrait and corporate biography. However, reverse-image correlation and persona-tracking tools reveal that the exact same photograph appears across hundreds of unrelated consulting, finance, lifestyle, demo, and template websites — each time under different names, titles, and jurisdictions.

Investigators describe this as a textbook case of synthetic leadership: a non-existent executive identity constructed using stock imagery and generic biographies to create the appearance of corporate legitimacy.

Notably, the same image appears within theBeratung demo ecosystem of the VamTam WordPress theme, hosted at beratung.vamtam.com — a public template showcase intended to demonstrate how a consulting firm websitemightlook. While VamTam is not accused of owning or operating StratixSolutions.us, the overlap strongly suggeststemplate-driven site construction combined with recycled persona assets.

Who Owns StratixSolutions.us?

Public WHOIS and registrar records show that:

  • Domain: stratixsolutions.us

  • Registrant name: Sandra Viviana Negrete

  • Listed organization: Strategyx LLC

  • Registrant/admin contact email: info@pmconsultingsolutions.com

  • Registrar: Registrar.eu

  • Nameservers: dns-parking.com

The use of a parked DNS configuration, combined with heavy IP churn and lack of verifiable business operations, is inconsistent with the public image of a functioning consulting or advisory firm, according to analysts.

Further reverse-WHOIS analysis links the same control email (info@pmconsultingsolutions.com) to dozens of other unrelated domains, spanning multiple industries and branding styles — a

 

pattern commonly associated with site-factory networks, lead-capture shells, or reputation-farming infrastructures, rather than a single coherent business.

What about beratung.vamtam.com?

beratung.vamtam.com itself is a legitimate theme demonstration site operated by the VamTam WordPress theme developer. Its relevance lies elsewhere: the presence of the same “Franklin Grant” image within the demo confirms that the portrait originates from stock or demo media libraries, not from a real executive.

Investigators stress an important distinction:

There is no evidence that VamTam controls or is connected to StratixSolutions.us.
The forensic significance is that the same stock persona is reused, reinforcing the conclusion that “Franklin Grant” is not a real individual.

A Wider Synthetic Persona Ecosystem

CyberDeleteme’s search tools show that the Franklin Grant image appears across 700+ profiles and websites, often portraying:

  • CEOs of unrelated consulting firms

  • Financial advisors

  • Legal professionals

  • Marketing executives

  • Generic “About Us” team members

In many cases, these sites also share other warning signs: anonymous ownership, residential addresses presented as offices, lack of regulatory disclosures, and minimal or non-existent social or professional footprint. 

What about beratung.vamtam.com?

beratung.vamtam.com itself is a legitimate theme demonstration site operated by the VamTam WordPress theme developer. Its relevance lies elsewhere: the presence of the same “Franklin Grant” image within the demo confirms that the portrait originates from stock or demo media libraries, not from a real executive.

Investigators stress an important distinction:

There is no evidence that VamTam controls or is connected to StratixSolutions.us.
The forensic significance is that the same stock persona is reused, reinforcing the conclusion that “Franklin Grant” is not a real individual.

A Wider Synthetic Persona Ecosystem

CyberDeleteme’s search tools show that the Franklin Grant image appears across 700+ profiles and websites, often portraying:

  • CEOs of unrelated consulting firms

  • Financial advisors

  • Legal professionals

  • Marketing executives

  • Generic “About Us” team members

In many cases, these sites also share other warning signs: anonymous ownership, residential addresses presented as offices, lack of regulatory disclosures, and minimal or non-existent social or professional footprint.

Why It Matters

Regulators and fraud-prevention bodies such as the FTC, SEC, and FINRA have repeatedly warned that fake executives and impersonated firms are a common feature of online investment and consulting fraud. Synthetic personas are used to build trust quickly, reduce scrutiny, and obscure accountability.

While this investigation does not allege criminal conduct, experts emphasize that the absence of verifiable leadership, transparent ownership, and operational continuity should prompt heightened caution from clients, partners, and platforms.

Bottom Line

Publicly available evidence shows that:

  • “Franklin Grant” is a fabricated persona, not a verifiable executive.

  • StratixSolutions.us relies on this persona while operating under opaque ownership and infrastructure.

  • The same image appears in template demo environments and hundreds of unrelated sites, confirming stock-image reuse.

For investigators, journalists, and regulators, the case illustrates how modern synthetic identities can easily scale across the web and why visual credibility alone is no longer evidence of authenticity.

Sources & Methodology
All findings are based exclusively on lawful open-source intelligence, domain registration records, reverse-image correlation, and the uploaded CyberDeleteme forensic report.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER & LIMITATION OF LIABILITY

1. Nature of the Report

This report is provided for informational, analytical, and due-diligence purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, financial advice, investment advice, or regulatory determination.

All findings are descriptive, not accusatory.

2. Source of Information

All data, images, technical records, and observations referenced in this report were obtained from:

  • Publicly available internet sources

  • Open DNS, WHOIS, and Certificate Transparency records

  • Publicly accessible social-media content

  • Lawful OSINT tools and methodologies

No private, confidential, hacked, leaked, or non-public data sources were accessed or used.

3. No Allegation of Criminal Conduct

Nothing in this report should be interpreted as:

  • An allegation of criminal activity

  • An assertion of fraud, deception, or illegality

  • An identification of any real individual behind the examined accounts

The report does not claim to establish intent, motive, or wrongdoing. It documents technical indicators, inconsistencies, and risk signals commonly assessed in digital verification and cyber-intelligence contexts.

4. Identity & Persona Disclaimer

References to online personas, names, images, or profiles:

  • Do not assert that a real person exists or does not exist

  • Do not identify or accuse any natural person

  • Reflect only the online representations observed

Where terms such as “synthetic persona,” “misattributed identity,” or “unverified profile” are used, they describe observable digital patterns, not personal attributes or intent.

5. Accuracy & Temporal Limitations

Digital data is inherently dynamic.
While Deleteme.com and CyberDeleteme take reasonable steps to ensure accuracy at the time of analysis:

  • Infrastructure, ownership, or content may change after publication

  • Findings reflect the state of publicly available information at the time of investigation

No guarantee is made that the findings will remain current indefinitely.

6. Use, Reliance & Third-Party Decisions

Any reliance on this report by third parties is at their own discretion and risk.
Deleteme.com and CyberDeleteme disclaim liability for:

  • Decisions made by readers or third parties

  • Actions taken based on interpretations of this report

  • Losses, damages, or consequences arising from its use

 

7. Neutrality & Independence

This investigation was conducted independently and without instruction, influence, or compensation from any party referenced in the report.

No conflict of interest is declared.

CONTACT & FURTHER INFORMATION

This report represents a summary of findings.

For:

  • Full technical annexes

  • Expanded source listings

  • Visual forensic diagrams

  • Underlying OSINT correlation data

  • Professional verification or follow-up investigations

You may contact:

Deleteme.com / CyberDeleteme Intelligence Unit
📧 Contact: support@deleteme.com
🌐 Website: https://www.deleteme.com

All additional disclosures are provided in accordance with applicable data-protection, privacy, and ethical standards.