Head to head
The gap
The security score is not a total of good things. It starts at 100 and eight channels each take a share of what is left, so one channel can settle a record on its own. Both records are drawn here on the same scale — the model’s own cap of 0.9 — rather than on a scale fitted to this pair, which would make every comparison look equally dramatic.
Line by line
Every field the contract publishes about a provider, in the contract’s own groups, including the rows where the two agree — a table that printed only differences would invent a disagreement, and one that printed only the interesting rows would be us choosing what is interesting. Open a group to read its rows; each one says how many it holds and how many of them the two records answer differently.
A green cell means the methodology itself prices that value below the other one, not that we prefer it. Rows the model does not price carry no mark at all: price is never marked, because nothing in the model says cheaper is safer, and neither is coverage, platform count or devices. Where a value was never established the cell says so instead of showing a zero.
What actually happened
Other pairs
Pairs within the top ten get a page — 80 comparisons in all. Records below that are not paired here: a comparison earns a page where the choice between the two is a real one, and that choice is made near the top of the register.
Security
Usability
Rank 3 of 68 in the register
Gibraltar · Commercial VPN
Exits in 41 countries
Security
Usability
Rank 7 of 68 in the register
United States · Censorship tool
Exits in 4 countries
No demand on the public record
1 documented demand, 1 of which produced data
Open questions
Still open on this record.
One no-logs audit, in 2019. IVPN is unusually explicit about what it does not do: its own post states that its last and only no-logs audit was Cure53 in March 2019, and that it has deliberately not repeated the format because such a stamp describes one day and not the days after it.
What the claim rests on now. Every audit since targets apps and services, so the no-logs claim on the infrastructure rests on the March 2019 engagement and on the February 2023 gateway review, not on anything recent.
The audit not yet published. The eighth annual Cure53 audit was scheduled for July 2026 and no report for 2025 or 2026 is published yet, which is why the latest report date is the April 2024 one.
The August 2026 incident. In August 2026 an attacker exploited a vulnerability in the self-hosted BTCPay Server, before it was public, and took IVPN's own Lightning operating funds. IVPN published the account four days later, unprompted, and scoped it to that machine: the VPN gateways were not involved, no customer records were reached, no customer money was lost.
Why it costs nothing. The model charges nothing for this, which is the point — an operator that says so promptly is behaving the way the field is meant to reward, and the entry is here so a reader knows it happened rather than to move a number.
What the engagements covered. The app pentest (iOS, Android, Electron, the daemon) is from March 2022 and the gateway/server-OS review from February 2023; neither tested the no-logs claim itself, the 2023 report says so explicitly, so retention rests on the privacy policy declaration alone.
The latest report is not the relevant one. April 2024's engagement, Cure53's sixth with IVPN, tested the customer account website, API and hosting; its own scope page names client apps and VPN servers out of scope, so it extends neither the app nor the gateway evidence, and V03_audit_subject reads unknown for it rather than carrying that credit forward. The seventh engagement, on the new email and DNS services, was only announced for May 2025; no report for it is published.
What the primary site never establishes. RAM-only is recorded as partial because IVPN describes it as a transition with test deployments under way, and has not announced its completion. Server hardware ownership (leased vs owned), traffic modification at the exit, and the beneficial owner's personal jurisdiction are unestablished: no primary IVPN page states any of the three, nor does user-base scale.
Three fields the knowledgebase answers, not the pages read at first fill. IP allocation is shared by design — "crowding" pools users on one address to blunt attribution. P2P is allowed everywhere, but IVPN asks customers to avoid US exits, citing upstream DMCA pressure. Streaming carries no guarantee, though the company says many customers do reach it.
Still open on this record.
Hardware ownership is not stated. Riseup's own government FAQ describes physical control of its core Seattle infrastructure ('not hosted in the cloud'), but says nothing about the VPN gateway machines in Montreal, Paris and Amsterdam, which sit on IP ranges typical of commercial hosts. C08_servers_ownership stays unknown rather than assumed from the Seattle statement.
The bare-minimum VPN log is described only by exclusion. The security page lists everything the 5-day rotating log does not contain (no IP, no fingerprint, no DNS requests, no metadata) but never states what it does contain. C01 is filled none_linkable on that exclusion list, but a reader who wants to know what the bytes actually are will not find it here.
Several usability fields have no documentation to read at all. Split tunneling, simultaneous device limits, P2P policy and streaming access are not addressed on any RiseupVPN page found this session, and the kill switch is confirmed only for the desktop tray client, not for Android.
The only independent audit is a client/infrastructure pentest, not a logging audit. The 2025 SRLabs report examined Bitmask and the Menshen bridge registrar for intercept and DPI risks; it never asked what the VPN servers retain, so V11_audit_findings is not_stated and the retention claim in C01 rests on Riseup's own word alone.
The 2012 seizure often cited against Riseup did not touch Riseup's own data. U.S. federal agents took a server from a colocation facility Riseup shared with May First/People Link, but the machine and its data belonged to a third tenant (European Counter Network); no Riseup account or user data was on it, which is why P01_seizure_event reads none_known rather than crediting an event that was never Riseup's to resist.
Notes
On the record as a whole.
First fill 2026-08-26. Sourced entirely from ivpn.net's own pages, the Cure53 audit PDFs and IVPN's blog — no affiliate or review-aggregator site cited.
On the record as a whole.
RiseupVPN is a free client of Riseup Networks, a US 501(c)(4) non-profit collective (riseup.net) operating since 1999; the VPN carries no price of its own and is sustained entirely by donations, which is why U04/U04b are not_applicable. RiseupVPN is a rebrand of the older Bitmask/Riseup-Black client built on the LEAP platform; its four gateways (Seattle, Montreal, Paris, Amsterdam) all sit in countries carrying a logging mandate per countries.csv, and hosting there is physical rather than virtual.
Recent changes
No change logged on this record
12 Sep 20265 changes
Security scoresecurity.score
42 changed to 40
IP allocation modelC03_ip_sharing
not on the record changed to shared
P2P allowedU12a_p2p_allowed
not on the record changed to partial
Major streaming services reachableU12b_streaming_works
not on the record changed to partial
Subject of the latest auditV03_audit_subject
app_security, infrastructure changed to not on the record
| ChannelPressure taken from what was left | IVPNDominant channel: Retention0 to 0.9, longer is worse | RiseupVPNDominant channel: Retention0 to 0.9, longer is worse |
|---|---|---|
| RetentionDoes a record exist that links traffic to a person, and who checked? | 0.526 | 0.497 |
| JurisdictionCan someone compel what exists, without the provider getting a say? | 0.030 | 0.200 |
| IntegrityHas it been caught saying one thing and doing another? | 0.000 | 0.200 |
| IgnoranceHow much of this did nobody establish? | 0.061 | 0.097 |
| DisclosureHas it already handed something over? | 0.000 | 0.087 |
| HygieneWhat identifying material is collected in passing, and can the client be checked at all? | 0.063 | 0.070 |
| ArchitectureWho operates the exit, and what does it do to the traffic? | 0.050 | 0.000 |
| SilenceTen years, millions of users and nothing on record? | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| What is left of 100The channels multiply: each one takes a share of what the one before it left standing | 38 | 25 |
By circumstance
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Torrenting | Allowed on some servers partial | — not established |
| Streaming | Some services reachable partial | — not established |
| Devices at once | 5 | — not established |
| Under censorship | Claimed to work claimed | Claimed to work claimed |
| Exits in mandate countries | None | None |
| Hosting in those countries | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
| Company under a mandate | No such mandate no | No such mandate no |
| Secret orders | No secret-order regime on record none_known | National security letters or their equivalent nsl_equivalent |
IVPN and RiseupVPN were assessed by the HushFleet team: IVPN scores 38/100 for security, in the Weak band, and RiseupVPN 25/100, in the Insufficient band. They share an independent audit, independent ownership and sign-up without an account. The 13-point gap opens widest on Integrity — “Has it been caught saying one thing and doing another?” — taking 0% from IVPN and 20% from RiseupVPN.
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Security | 38 weak · rank 3 of 68 | 25 insufficient · rank 7 of 68 |
| Usability | 66 out of 100 | 65 out of 100 |
| Record completeness | 89% usability 100% | 88% usability 64% |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Who operates the exit | Run by the provider itself provider_operated | Run by the provider itself provider_operated |
| Retention as declared | Nothing that links traffic to a person none_linkable | Nothing that links traffic to a person none_linkable |
| RAM-only diskless servers | Part of the fleet partialBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
| IP allocation model | Exit address shared between users sharedBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
| Signup without email | Yes, on the provider's word yes_declared | Yes, on the provider's word yes_declared |
| Anonymous payment options | Cash · Cryptocurrency paid directlyBivpn.net · 2 sources · | The service takes no payment at allBriseup.net · |
| Own DNS inside the tunnel | Yes, on the provider's word yes_declaredBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
| Worst third-party SDK category in the app | No third-party SDK none | No third-party SDK none |
| Worst third-party tracker category on the site | Analytics analyticsBivpn.net · | No third-party tracker noneBriseup.net · |
| Who owns the hardware | — not established | — not established |
| Offered countries that sit under a logging mandate | None | None |
| Hosting in the mandate countries it offers | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
| Incorporation country mandates retention | No such mandate no | No such mandate no |
| Beneficial owner sits under a retention regime | — not establishedno source published | No such regime noBriseup.net · |
| Persistent device identifier | An identifier scoped to the app app_scoped_idBivpn.net · | None held noneBriseup.net · 2 sources · |
| Weakest protocol still offered | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
| What the exit does to passing traffic | — not establishedno source published | Traffic passes through unaltered noneBriseup.net · |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| At least one independent audit | Yes, and the report was read yes_verified | Yes, and the report was read yes_verified |
| How the report is published | The full report is published full_pdf | The full report is published full_pdf |
| Subject of the audit | — not establishedAcure53.de · | The infrastructure · The protocol · The app's securityAopentech.fund · |
| Server fleet coverage | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
| Auditor name | Cure53Acure53.de · 3 sources · | Security Research Labs (SRLabs) |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Server seizure by law enforcement | No seizure on record none_known | No seizure on record none_known |
| Actual disclosure history | No disclosure on record none_knownBivpn.net · | Account data was handed over account_data_disclosedBriseup.net · |
| Court record of compelled production | Told a court it had nothing to produce unable_to_produceBivpn.net · 2 sources · | Produced account data produced_account_dataBriseup.net · |
| Response to a national logging mandate | Was never present in that country |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Documented gap between claim and behaviour | No documented lie none | No documented lie none |
| Marketing against audit findings | No gap on record none | No gap on record none |
| Ownership structure transparency | Ownership is stated and checkable clear | Ownership is stated and checkable clear |
| Adverse events on the owner group record | Nothing adverse on record clean | Nothing adverse on record clean |
| How the service is paid for | Paid subscriptions only paid_onlyBivpn.net · | A free tier funded by the paid one freemium_fundedBriseup.net · 2 sources · |
| Claims of 100% anonymity or military-grade crypto | Makes no such claim no |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Legal entity | IVPN Limited, 5 Secretary's lane, GX11 1AA, GibraltarBivpn.net · | Riseup NetworksBriseup.net · 2 sources · |
| Where the company sits | Gibraltar GIBivpn.net · 2 sources · | United States USBriseup.net · |
| Year the service launched | 2009Bivpn.net · | 1999Briseup.net |
| IVPN | RiseupVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| Platforms with a client | 6 Windows, macOS, Linux, iOS, Android, RoutersBivpn.net · | 4 Linux, macOS, Windows, AndroidBriseup.net · |
| Countries with an exit | 41 countriesBivpn.net · | 4 countriesBapi.black.riseup.net:443 · |
| Paying monthly | $6.00 per monthBivpn.net · | — the question does not ariseno source published |
| Paying yearly | $60.00 a year at renewal, billed once |
| Auditor category | A security specialist security_specialist | A security specialist security_specialist |
|---|
| Assurance standard | Another standard otherno source published · | No standard stated noneAopentech.fund · |
|---|
| Date of latest report | 2024-04-08Acure53.de · | 2025-05-16Aopentech.fund · |
|---|
| Audit cadence | An annual series annual_seriesBivpn.net · 4 sources · | One-off one_offBopentech.fund · |
|---|
| Total published audits | 7Bivpn.net · | 1Bopentech.fund · |
|---|
| Retention as the report states it | The report does not address retention not_stated | The report does not address retention not_stated |
|---|
| Client source code published | Every client all | Every client all |
|---|
| Reproducible builds | — not established | — not established |
|---|
| Separate pentest | Yes, and the report was read yes_verified | Yes, and the report was read yes_verified |
|---|
| Strength of the assurance opinion | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
|---|
no_presence| — the question does not ariseno source published |
| Transparency report | Current, with request numbers fresh_with_numbersBivpn.net · | No report noneBriseup.net · |
|---|
| Reported numbers plausible for this scale | The numbers are plausible at this scale plausibleno source published · | — the question does not ariseno source published |
|---|
| Warrant canary discipline | Kept current maintained | Kept current maintained |
|---|
| Requests received | 34Bivpn.net · | — the question does not ariseno source published |
|---|
| Requests that produced data | 0Bivpn.net · | — the question does not ariseno source published |
|---|
| Secret-order regime | No secret-order regime on record none_knownBivpn.net · 2 sources · | National security letters or their equivalent nsl_equivalentBriseup.net · 2 sources · |
|---|
| Chronology of documented enforcement events | 0 No demand on the public recordBivpn.net · 2 sources · | 1 documented demandBriseup.net · |
|---|
no| Aggressive lifetime subscriptions | Does not no | Does not no |
|---|
| Coverage exists only on affiliate sites | Covered outside affiliate sites too no | Covered outside affiliate sites too no |
|---|
| Security incident and how it was disclosed | Disclosed by the provider, promptly self_disclosed_promptBivpn.net · | Disclosed by someone else third_party_disclosedAopentech.fund · 2 sources · |
|---|
| Affiliate programme and payout tier | No affiliate programme none | No affiliate programme none |
|---|
| Owner-run review media discloses the tie | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
|---|
| App store declaration | The store form matches the published policy matches_policy | The store form matches the published policy matches_policy |
|---|
| User base scale (mass >=10M, mid >=1M, niche <1M) | — not established | — not established |
|---|
| Ultimate beneficial owner as written | Nicholas Pestell, founder and CEO, 100% owner of IVPN LimitedBivpn.net · | Riseup Collective (self-governed autonomous collective; no external owner)Briseup.net · |
|---|
| Other businesses of the owner group | None disclosed | None disclosed |
|---|
| Country of the ultimate beneficial owner | — not establishedno source published | USBriseup.net · 2 sources · |
|---|
| Owner group | independent | independent |
|---|
| Date the current owner took control | — the question does not arise | — the question does not arise |
|---|
| Role of this brand inside the group | The group's principal brand principal | The group's principal brand principal |
|---|
| Infrastructure shared with cluster siblings | Separate infrastructure separate | Separate infrastructure separate |
|---|
| — the question does not ariseno source published |
| Usable free tier | No free tier noneBivpn.net · | A free tier with no data cap unlimited_freeBriseup.net · |
|---|
| Works under active censorship | Claimed to work claimed | Claimed to work claimed |
|---|
| Protocols offered | 4 WireGuard, OpenVPN, IKEv2, An obfuscated protocolBivpn.net · 2 sources · | 2 OpenVPN, An obfuscated protocolBapi.black.riseup.net:443 · |
|---|
| Kill switch coverage | On every platform all_platformsBivpn.net · 2 sources · | On desktop only desktop_onlyBriseup.net · |
|---|
| Split tunneling available | Available yesBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
|---|
| Simultaneous connections | 5Bivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
|---|
| Friction to start using it | No account needed no_account | No account needed no_account |
|---|
| P2P allowed | Allowed on some servers partialBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
|---|
| Major streaming services reachable | Some services reachable partialBivpn.net · | — not establishedno source published |
|---|
