The Sovereignty Scorecard
AltLibre reviews the technology Europe depends on, and scores what the large analyst houses cannot: what the vendor owes the European citizen, and whether the continent can afford the relationship for the decade ahead. The method is public, so every score can be argued with.
Why a scorecard
Almost all technology review scores the same things: features, price, performance. The questions that matter most to a European buyer are scored nowhere, because the obvious bodies to score them are paid by the vendors they would score. Where the data sleeps. Which courts can compel it. What the terms of service permit when nobody is watching. Whether Europe can keep, maintain, defend and support the relationship without hollowing out its own capability.
The scorecard fills that gap with a method rather than a mood. Eight criteria, split across a technical block and a values block, plus environmental impact and European sustainability. Every level of every criterion is defined in advance, so two reviewers holding the same evidence can be forced to the same number.
The method
The full method is published: the eight criteria, the scoring scale, the criterion-level rubric, the evidence rules and the review template. It is free to read, and free to lift into a procurement file, under CC BY-SA 4.0.
The criteria
- Block A, the technical relationship. Residency and jurisdiction; encryption and key control; exit terms.
- Block B, what the vendor owes the citizen. Transparency record; ownership and ultimate control; citizen protection in the contract.
- Block C, the decade. Environmental impact; European sustainability, scored through three named proxies, money flow, capability and continuity.
The reviews
Each review carries the same fixed head: product, evidence dates, scores and tier, with the capture date attached to every tier. Vendors receive the draft scores, the evidence behind them and the rubric applied, at least 14 days before publication, and replies run in full beside the review. Corrections are logged openly.
The index
The league table of the technology Europe depends on, rolled up quarterly with a short commentary per block. Stale scores carry a flag and drop out until refreshed.
| Product | Category | Overall | Tier | Captured | Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft 365 E5 | Productivity | 2.3 | Conditional | 25 September 2026 | Read |
| Zoom Workplace | Communications | 1.6 | Dependent | 1 October 2026 | Read |
Reference material
Three maintained reference pages support the reviews: the office-suite comparison, the migration guide and the licensing cost model. They sit in the quiet reference section, each with its assumptions and review date on the page.
Independence
No vendor may pay for a review, a score, a placement or a mention, before or after publication. Advisory clients are not reviewed while the engagement lasts. The research is not for sale.