About
An independent publisher, with the details you can check.
METARUBY publishes original cybersecurity education. It sells nothing, recommends nothing, and takes money from no one whose products it writes about.
What this is
METARUBY is a publishing platform for technical writing about security: how attacks are constructed, why particular designs make particular mistakes attractive, and what a person can realistically check for themselves. It is written in English for a general technical audience — people who are comfortable reading carefully but who should not have to read a specification to stay safe.
The subject matter includes the security of Web3 interfaces, because that is an area where the gap between what people are told and what is actually happening is unusually wide. It is deliberately not a place to trade, invest, connect anything, or be sold anything.
Why independence matters here
Most consumer-facing writing about wallet security is produced by organisations that also want a transaction from the reader. That is not automatically dishonest, but it does shape the output: the risks that are inconvenient to the business model get less space, and the calls to action arrive earlier than the explanations.
METARUBY keeps that pressure out of the writing by keeping revenue away from it. The site may carry one clearly marked sponsorship slot, below the content, and nothing else is for sale: no affiliate links, no referral codes, no sponsored articles, no paid reviews. A sponsor buys that space and has no say over a single word we publish. That separation is the reason the writing can say “we do not know” and “this cannot be fixed, only reduced” when those are the honest answers.
What we will not publish
The following are not editorial preferences that might change with a new writer. They are standing constraints on what may appear on this domain:
- Financial, investment, legal or tax advice of any kind
- Price forecasts, yield or APY comparisons, or trading signals
- Affiliate links, referral codes, sponsored articles or paid reviews
- Anything that asks a reader to connect a wallet, sign, approve, or transfer
- Instructions to install software, run a file, or begin a remote session
- Claims of guaranteed protection, absolute security or recovery of lost assets
- Any suggestion that we are, or speak for, a vendor whose product we describe
What we do not claim
It is as important to be clear about what this publication is not. METARUBY holds no security certification, accreditation or licence, and claims none. It is not an auditor, not an incident-response provider, and not affiliated with, authorised by or endorsed by any vendor named in its articles.
What it offers instead is traceability: every technical claim points to a primary source you can read yourself, and every article ends with the full list. You are not asked to trust our authority, because we are not asserting any. You are asked to check the references.
Method
How an article gets made
The full version is in the editorial policy. This is the short one.
-
The question comes first
We start from something a reader would actually search for, then check what already answers it. If the existing material is adequate, we do not add to it. An article has to contribute something the reader could not already get.
-
Primary sources, not secondary summaries
Technical behaviour is established from the specification, the vendor's own documentation, or a public advisory from a named institution — not from other people's articles about them. Where a claim cannot be traced to such a source, it is removed rather than softened.
-
Structure before prose
The direct answer goes at the top. Sections are ordered so a reader who needs only one of them can find it, and each substantial section stands on its own without the surrounding argument.
-
Checked against the claim list
Before publication, every factual assertion is matched to a reference, every external link is resolved, and the draft is read once more specifically for overstatement — guarantees, absolutes and implied promises are the failure mode we look for hardest.
-
Dated, and corrected in the open
Publication and last-reviewed dates are shown on the page. Substantive corrections update the revision date and are described; fixing a typo does not get dressed up as a new edition.
Found something wrong?
Corrections are the part of this that depends on readers. If a claim is inaccurate, a source has moved, or an explanation has aged badly, tell us and we will fix it on the page and date the change.