Insufficient

OVPN

Commercial VPNUnited StatesRank 8 of 68

Paying monthly

$12.00 per month

Paying yearly

$59.88 billed once a year

Coverage

20 countries with an exit

Free tier

No paid plans only

24 out of 100

Security

62 out of 100

Usability

Visit site

Service class

Commercial VPN — security leads

Security score

24 of 100 · Insufficient

Usability score

62 of 100 · state known · 100% established · 100.0% of the weight read

Legal entity

OVPN Inc.

Jurisdiction

United States

Ultimate owner

Pango

Exposure

Medium · dominant channel: retention

Retention

Nothing that links traffic to a person

Latest audit

unknown · unknown · unknown · unknown

Countries with exits

Protocols

OpenVPN WireGuard An obfuscated protocol

Works under active censorship

Claimed to work

Weakest protocol still offered

not applicable

Own DNS inside the tunnel

Yes, on the provider's word

Platforms

Windows macOS Linux Android iOS Routers

Simultaneous devices

Kill switch

On desktop only

Split tunnelling

Available

Signing up

No account needed

Free tier

No free tier

P2P allowed

Allowed

Major streaming services reachable

Reachable

Price, monthly

$12.00 per month

Price, yearly

$59.88 a year at renewal, billed once

Offered countries that sit under a logging mandateC09_mandate_countries

Country of the ultimate beneficial ownerM11_owner_jurisdiction

Owner group cluster keyM15_owner_group

pango

Date the current owner took controlM16_control_since

2023-05-08

Role of this brand inside the groupM17_brand_role

acquired_brand

Infrastructure shared with cluster siblingsM18_shared_infrastructure

separate

Total published auditsV10_audit_count

unknown

Where the security score comes from

Eight channels, each asking one question of the published record and reading a named set of fields to answer it. They multiply rather than add — the factor beside a channel is what is left after the pressure it found, and open a channel to see every field it read, as it is stored. How the model works

Security fields

67 55 of them feed a channel

Established

42 22 left unknown, 3 not applicable

Completeness

70% the share the model could weigh

Citations

65 across 32 documents

Every value carries what it rests on, and the model weighs the four levels differently. Weight, then how many citations on this record sit at that level:

A weighs 1.00 · 1 hereB weighs 0.85 · 62 hereC weighs 0.70 · 2 here

The weights are methodology.json’s own; a claim seen in the artefact itself counts for more than the same claim reported second-hand. The date at the end of a row is the day that value was last read.

A channel does not price every field it reads. The ones it did are marked along their edge and carry what they added; everything else was read and cost nothing. Only a channel that composes field by field can mark a field at all — the rest price themselves by the parameters printed above their rows.

Still open on this record.

No independent audit. No third-party security, infrastructure or no-logs audit of OVPN's own systems was found on its site, in press or in help documentation; the closest adversarial test of its no-logs claim is the 2020 Swedish court proceeding, which is not an audit and does not speak to the current WireGuard/OpenVPN stack in detail.

Owner-group history predates OVPN's acquisition. The adverse finding behind this record's inclusion (X04) is a 2017 complaint against AnchorFree, Pango's corporate predecessor, over Hotspot Shield's ad-network data sharing — six years before Pango acquired OVPN. It was never adjudicated by the FTC, and OVPN's own infrastructure and policies are separately documented in this record.

Corporate structure split across two entities. OVPN's current Terms of Service and Privacy Notice name OVPN Inc. (Redwood City, California) as the contracting party, while OVPN's own help center names OVPN Integritet AB (Sweden, org. no. 556999-4469) as the operator. Both are described as under the same ultimate owner, Pango; which entity holds the infrastructure and legal responsibility for a given user was not resolved further.

RetentionDoes a record exist that links traffic to a person, and who checked?13 fields read · 10 left unknown · 32.9 points of pressure×0.671

Composed rather than added: a prior of 0.55 on the none branch, moved by what the paper says (0.0) and by what the practice shows (0.425), at credence 0.425 from the audit and 0.2975 from how the provider engaged, against a severity of 0.03 for what is actually retained.

Retention linkable to a person as declaredmaterialC01_linkable_retention

none_linkable

Bovpn.com13 Sep 2026

Report a problem with C01_linkable_retention

Persistent device identifier the provider holdsC12_device_identifier

none

Bplay.google.com Bapps.apple.com Bsupport.ovpn.com13 Sep 2026

Report a problem with C12_device_identifier

At least one independent auditmaterialV01_audit_exists

Computed

×0.239 of a clean record completeness 70%

Where the drop comes from: Retention. It is the channel this record's risk is concentrated in — on its own it takes a clean record to ×0.671, and its bar above is filled to that.

Exposure is recorded as medium and the integrity status as clean.

This record sits above the register's average on all 8 channels. The narrowest margin is Integrity, ×0.677 against ×0.658.

Published score

Every row above is one field of the published record, and every one of them can be challenged: every row carries Report, or raise something about the record as a whole. A correction with a source behind it is made the same day, and if it moves the score it moves the rank.

Specification

Carried, never scored

Countries with an exit

Compared with

What changed

If this one is not right

OVPN

Proton VPN

Mullvad VPN

IVPN

Where the security score comes from