How we test
What SoftwareHQ inspects, calculates and observes — and what those records do not prove.
Why this page exists
Review pages mix several kinds of material. A vendor pricing URL, an editorial score, a screenshot and a public-website observation are not the same kind of evidence. This page is the published method for how those records are labelled, dated and limited.
SoftwareHQ does not invent firsthand experience, named reviewers, audits, prices or test results. A missing test stays not tested. An empty evidence list is omitted from the review; it is not rendered as a blank section.
Four evidence kinds
Optional editorial-evidence records are keyed by product or category. Each record has a kind, a method, an Australia/Sydney observation date, a reviewer, a scope, HTTPS sources, limitations and reproducible inputs.
| Kind | What it records | What it is not |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor documentation | Public vendor, help or compliance pages. Method: document review. | Not a product walkthrough and not proof that every sentence on a review was checked against that URL. |
| External audit | Named auditor, audited scope, report or announcement URL, report date, and whether the full report was inspected. | A vendor announcement is not a full-report inspection. An inspected report is not a SoftwareHQ security score. |
| Original analysis | Exact source prices in integer cents, assumptions and the formula used. | Not a lab benchmark and not a claim about unpublished promotional pricing. |
| Firsthand test | Actual steps, outcomes and an artifact when the result is passed, failed or inconclusive. Methods: public workflow observation or live measurement. | Missing tests stay not tested. Observing a public website is not paid-app testing. |
What we inspect
Bounded public buying workflows: locating listed pricing, billed terms, renewal or promotion copy, seat or payroll limits, and cancellation or export documentation where those pages are public. Original calculations use the listed prices recorded on those pages. The accounting listed-price comparison for three illustrative scenarios is published at /guides/accounting-cost-comparison. The VPN source-based buying filter is published at /guides/vpn-australia-buying-guide. Independently calculated billed-term and renewal cash is published at /guides/vpn-introductory-renewal-pricing. How this site classifies VPN audit claims, announcements and inspected reports is published at /guides/vpn-audits-no-logs-explained. Free-tier caps versus paid plans are published at /guides/free-vs-paid-vpn-australia. How kill switch, split tunnel and protocol lists vary by OS is published at /guides/vpn-platform-kill-switch-guide. Consumer public-internet exits versus private-resource access, SSO, device controls, logging and team deployment is published at /guides/business-vpn-vs-remote-access. None of these is a product ranking.
- Observation dates use the Australia/Sydney calendar date. Optional times are local clock times on that date.
- Source URLs are HTTPS. Artifact links are a local path under
/editorial-evidence/and/or an HTTPS href. - Reviewer identity is the SoftwareHQ editorial team unless a real approved named author exists. We do not invent people.
What we do not do
- We do not create accounts, start trials, submit forms or make purchases for these records.
- We do not substitute another country’s site when the Australian workflow is inaccessible. That limitation is recorded instead.
- We do not turn website navigation into a usability score or invent elapsed times.
- We do not print a quality or security score from how many evidence records exist.
- We do not treat vendor-provided screenshots as firsthand testing. Those images stay labelled as vendor-provided imagery.
Claims that need a matching record
Copy on a review must match the records on that review. In particular:
- A public-website observation does not support a claim that the product was used under a SoftwareHQ account. Live measurement of a logged-in product is a different method and is recorded separately, or left not tested.
- An audit announcement with the full report not inspected does not support an independent-audit conclusion.
- Documentation and evidence count do not support a ranking of products by speed or by security.
Dates that move, and dates that do not
Freshness badges on a review can age after a static export using the current Australia/Sydney date. That clock does not rewrite evidence observed_at, product last_verified, Article dateModified, or price-history dates. A later visit is not a new observation.
How reviews show this
Each review has a “How this review was made” section. When editorial-evidence records exist for that product, a separate “What we inspected” panel lists kind labels, observation dates, limitations and accessible source and artifact links. When there are no records, that panel is omitted. Older reviews keep working.
JSON-LD on a review keeps the visible editorial score and the SoftwareHQ editorial-team author. Evidence volume is not an aggregateRating and is not a quality or security rating.
Independence
Affiliate links, where they exist, do not change scores or evidence records. Products cannot pay for a firsthand result or a higher editorial score. See the editorial policy for scoring, affiliate disclosure and corrections.