I still don't get it:

The original:

"It’s pretty much impossible to validate that you are meeting the terms of your contract re: security policy if you’re doing that. You almost certainly were if you were providing SOC services to a big telco."

That second sentence seems to be only interpretable as:

You almost certainly were meeting the terms of your contract re: security policy if you were providing SOC services to a big telco.

However it also says it's impossible to validate - so if it is impossible to validate that you were meeting the terms of your contract re: security policy, it must mean you weren't meeting the terms of your contract because such a contract will require validation.

But I guess I should let it go.