During the Cold War, the US used imagery intelligence (such as satellite images) to collect information on Soviet weapons of mass destruction (Pringle & Ranson, 2025). This method continued to be used by governments and security forces, and are today open for many more to use. Free versions of satellite data and digital resources can be found on a wide array of platforms, along with videos teaching the public how to use them. Open source information, that is publicly available information that any member of the public can observe, purchase or request without requiring special legal status or unauthorized access (United Nations & University of California, Berkeley, 2022), has become a given in today’s digital world. This has brought about the term open source investigations, which refers to utilizing information from publicly available sources to address specific issues or questions. It exists in many forms, such as open source journalism, and a variety of “intelligences”. Among them are OSINT (Open Source Intelligence), GEOINT (Geospatial Intelligence), IMINT (Imagery Intelligence), SIGINT (Signal Intelligence: radio signal, etc.), and HUMINT (Human Intelligence: interviews, eyewitnesses, etc.). Open source investigations are used on a global scale to investigate anything from news, social media, and statements from public officials, to human rights violations, war crimes, and wildfires.
In fact, there are many examples of OSINT being implemented. The Swedish State Television (SVT) Verifieringshjälpen (eng. The verifying help) has verified photos from social media, displaying record-breaking amounts of snow in Kamtjatka, Russia. Bellingcat has used satellite imagery for mapping strikes on Iranian Police stations, and geolocating videos from social media of child soldiers in Sudan. The Independent questioned the US president Donald Trump when confronting the South African president Cyril Ramaphosa with the South African genocide in 2025. Forensic Architecture investigated Israel’s assault on the Gaza strip, chemical attacks in Syria (in Khan Sheikhoun, Douma, and Al Lataminah), and torture and detention in Myanmar. Human Rights Watch (HRW) have used remotely sensed data on fires when investigating the destruction of buildings in Burma, and deforestation in the Amazon.
There are of course many more examples, not only from journalists, researchers and NGOs (Nongovernmental Organizations). Military personnel, stalkers, human rights advocates, bored teenagers, law enforcement, terrorists, influencers – they can all use it. Anyone can be a fact-finder.
Or… Can they?
Access, ability and ethics
In reality, it is not always as easy as “anyone” can be a fact-finder, because although data and information might be free, most other things are not. In reality, anyone with access to internet, electricity, a computer or smartphone – and the knowledge and ability to use it – can be a fact-finder. Those with good eyes for details, local knowledge and the ability to speak multiple languages also gain some advantages, as those who are visually impaired, or lack local knowledge (or the understanding of certain languages) might completely miss important details in the midst of all the web’s available information.
This relatively wide availability also brings about the Dual-Use-Dilemma: If something is useful for unethical purposes, does it justify not producing it to be used for ethically sound purposes? Are the rewards worth the risks? This dilemma refers to situations where information, tools, or technologies developed for legitimate or beneficial purposes can be used for harmful or malicious purposes as well. Satellite data can for example be used for research, prosecution of human rights violations, or finding your way to a new location. But it can also be used for locating military targets, stalking people, and spreading false information to the untrained public.
Data collection
Everyone with access to a camera and internet, can also contribute to the collection of data, although they might not be a part of the analysis of it. Violence, crime and a variety of violations are uploaded to social media continuously. Well-known examples are those of terror groups like ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), which film and post executions. From these visuals, authorities were able to identify perpetrators, and later convict a Swedish man of war crimes in Syria. Such evidence is abundant in many of today’s conflicts, but are unfortunately also often deleted from social media by the Big Tech owning the platforms. As these videos and photos often include graphic content, they are removed from many platforms, even before other users have seen them. This might be good in the aspects of protecting the anonymity of the victims, but it also removes evidence that can be used against the perpetrators. Each platform has their own reasoning in their user guidelines, but it is often mentioned as an act to “inhibit the glorification of violence”, or to “protect the platforms users”.
Available tools
There is a vista of tools and resources available for open source investigations, some a simple as a reverse image search. Visual search engines can be used to find the original source of an image, which can add context to it. This can help indicate if an image is a photograph, a generation, or an alternation. It can also tell us where it was taken, by whom and when. It is of course important to remember that images are only visualizations of something, and not necessarily the absolute truth.
Keeping an eye out for spatial or temporal information in images or text can also help indicate suspicious information. Platforms like suncalc.org can help us question the time of day or year a photo was taken, which in turn can be used to question the reliability of the image, post or article in question. The image can be real, displaying an event that actually happened, but the text combined with it may be false, or true for an unrelated event. Shadows can tell us if an image was taken at the time, and sometimes place, stated in the text.
Platforms payed for by the taxpayers can sometimes hold vast amounts of free data. Examples of such are the European Space agency (ESA) and Copernicus data portal. The Copernicus browser is a user-friendly option for accessing a variety of satellite imagery (global, although focuses on land areas). FIRMS is another example, managed by NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), which can be used to locate fires around the world. It is however biased towards large fires, as small fires can be difficult to register by satellites. Not managed by governmental agencies, but another good option for easily accessing satellite imagery through time is Google Earth.
For tracking aerial or marine vessels, FlightAware, FlightRadar24 and VesselFinder are good options, although going far back in time might be problematic. The WayBackMachine is however great at going back in time, especially when looking for previously available – now deleted – information. There are of course also websites focusing specifically on collecting available resources and data, such as UNISHKA.
Shape the story
Open source investigations are powerful when combating crime, but for most people, their value lies in everyday use: questioning and critically engaging with social- and news media. In a world where information is abundant, the real challenge is not finding it, but questioning it. Access may be widespread, but understanding information, and choosing to use it ethically, is where the real weight lies. Because in the end, how information is interpreted and shared does not just shape understanding, but also what is accepted as truth.
References and additional reading
Dubberley, S. and Ivens, G. (2022). Outlining a Human-Rights Based Approach to Digital Open Source Investigations: A guide for human rights organisations and open source researchers. Project Report. University of Essex, Human Rights, Big Data and Technology Project.
Lyons, J. (2012). Documenting violations of international humanitarian law from space: a critical review of geospatial analysis of satellite imagery during armed conflicts in Gaza (2009), Georgia (2008), and Sri Lanka (2009). International Review of the Red Cross 94(886). doi: 10.1017/S1816383112000756
Madden, M., and Ross, A. (2009). Genocide and GIScience: Integrating Personal Narratives and Geographic Information Science to Study Human Rights. The Professional Geographer, 61(4), 508–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330120903163480
McDermott, Y., Murray, D., and Koenig, A. (2019). Digital Accountability Symposium: Whose Stories Get Told, and by Whom? Representativeness in Open Source Human Rights Investigations. OpinioJuris
Pringle, R. W., and Ransom, H. H. (2025, September 12). intelligence. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/intelligence-international-relations/Sources-of-intelligence
Pritchard, S.B. (2017). The Trouble with Darkness: NASA’s Suomi Satellite Images of Earth at Night. Environmental History 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/envhis/emw102
United Nations & University of California, Berkeley (Eds). (2022). Berkeley protocol on digital open source investigations: A practical guide on the effective use of digital open source information in investigating violations of international criminal, human rights and humanitarian law. United Nations Human Rights, Office of the High Commissioner; Human Rights Center, UC Berkeley School of Law.
