A structured account of what is publicly discoverable about you, produced before someone else compiles it.
Before a board appointment, a public role, a transaction or an interview, it is worth knowing what a competent researcher would find. Most people have never looked at their own public record this closely.
Mirror compiles that picture using Greyline's standard open-source research method, applied to the client's own record rather than an opposing party's. It assesses which findings carry genuine risk and sets out what can realistically be reduced.
The subject of the report is the client. There is no adverse party, and the research is conducted on the client's own record only.
What official and semi-official records show against your name.
| Source | What We Check |
|---|---|
| Corporate registries | Directorships, shareholdings, and registered addresses |
| Property records | Property ownership linked to your name, where publicly recorded |
| Court and insolvency records | County court judgments, bankruptcy, and litigation history |
| Electoral and public directories | Current and historical address exposure |
What a search of your name actually surfaces.
| Source | What We Check |
|---|---|
| Social media profiles | Public posts, connections, and profile information |
| Search engine results | What appears across the first several pages of results for your name |
| Forums and community platforms | Historical posts and mentions |
| Images and video | Publicly available photographs and footage featuring you |
Where your personal information is being aggregated and resold.
| Source | What We Check |
|---|---|
| Data broker listings | Personal details aggregated and resold by broker sites |
| People-search platforms | Address, phone number, and relative information exposed |
| Marketing databases | Evidence of your data circulating in marketing lists |
Whether your identifiers have already surfaced somewhere they should not have.
| Source | What We Check |
|---|---|
| Known data breaches | Your identifiers appearing in disclosed breach datasets |
| Dark web marketplaces | Credentials or personal data offered for sale |
| Credential reuse indicators | Signs of password or credential reuse across services |
Structured open-source search across public records, media, social platforms and data-broker listings
Assessment of exposure in known breach data associated with the client's identifiers
Risk-rated findings, distinguishing what is inaccurate, what is accurate but reducible, and what is fixed
A prioritised reduction plan with a named route for each item
An annual re-scan against the original baseline, showing what has changed
Removal or suppression of content on the client's behalf
Litigation, complaints or right-to-erasure applications
Research into any person other than the client
Monitoring between scans, covered separately through Greyline Shield
Executives before appointment or public scrutiny, and candidates for public office, most commonly instruct this work. Family offices acting for principals and their families, and professionals in regulated sectors, also instruct it.
An inquiry is submitted and a scoping call confirms the client's identity and the identifiers to be researched.
Structured open-source research is carried out across public records, media, social platforms, and data-broker listings.
Findings are risk-rated and checked against known breach data associated with the client's identifiers.
A prioritised reduction plan is prepared, with a named route set out for each reducible item.
The report is delivered, with an annual re-scan against the original baseline scheduled for twelve months later.
The following are illustrative examples of how Mirror is typically used, not accounts of specific client engagements.
A prospective non-executive director wants to know what a nominations committee's own background check, or a curious journalist, would find before accepting an appointment.
A candidate wants a clear, honest picture of their own public record before opponents or the press start looking, so nothing surfaces as a surprise during a campaign.
A family office principal preparing for a public transaction wants to understand and reduce identifiable personal exposure before the announcement draws wider attention.
An executive departing a high-profile position wants to understand what residual public exposure remains, and what can realistically be reduced now that the role has ended.
| Section | Content |
|---|---|
| Executive summary | The headline findings and what they mean in practice |
| Scope and identifiers | The identifiers researched, confirmed with you at scoping |
| Method | How the research was conducted and logged |
| Findings: public records and directories | What official and semi-official records show, risk-rated |
| Findings: social and digital footprint | What a search of your name actually surfaces, risk-rated |
| Findings: brokers, search results and breach exposure | Data broker listings, search result accuracy, and breach exposure |
| Reduction plan | A named route and expected timescale for every reducible finding |
| Limitations and scope | What this audit does, and does not, establish |
The specimen below shows a full baseline exposure audit, illustrating the report structure above section by section. The client, the findings and the reduction plan are fictitious.
Download the specimen report (PDF) →This work is scoped narrowly and deliberately, for reasons worth stating plainly.
Every enquiry is reviewed by an analyst and routed to a scoping call, a written scope is confirmed before any work begins.