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
19 48 left unknown, 0 not applicable
Completeness
31% the share the model could weigh
Citations
20 across 9 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:
B weighs 0.85 · 16 hereD weighs 0.35 · 4 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.
Legal identity. No page on vpnmasterpro.com states a legal entity name or country of incorporation; the only company name found anywhere is the Apple App Store seller record, "VPN VPN VPN Proxy Master Unlimited Inc," which the site itself never repeats. Jurisdiction, ownership and every field that derives from it stay unknown until a filing or registry record names the operator.
Audit claim, no report. An April 2025 press release claims "the highest possible security rating in an independent audit" but names no firm, no scope and no report; nothing else on the site or its media page links to a document. V01 is recorded as declared on that claim alone, and every field describing the engagement's scope and findings stays unknown.
the rest of what is open — 191 more words
Internal contradictions, device count and protocols. The FAQ and homepage say the plan covers "up to 10 devices," while the Features page caps the Premium plan at "up to 5 devices simultaneously." Protocols show the same pattern: the download page lists only "OpenVPN," while the iOS App Store description adds WireGuard and a proprietary "VMPGuard." U10_simultaneous_devices and U07_protocols were left unknown rather than picking a side.
Internal contradictions, business model. The App Store calls this a "free VPN with optional premium features," while the site's own pricing page lists three paid plans and no free option. U05_free_tier and X05_monetisation_model were left unknown rather than picking a side.
Fleet unpublished. No page lists server countries or locations; the site advertises only "a vast network of VPN servers around the world." U02_server_countries and everything downstream of it stay unknown.
Store privacy label versus site policy. Apple's App Privacy section for the iOS app states usage data "may be used to track you across apps and websites owned by other companies," a disclosure the privacy policy never makes; the policy instead says the company does not "track, collect, or share" user data at all.
On the record as a whole.
Sold under the brand "VMP™" alongside sibling apps from the same site (password manager, dark-web monitoring, a messenger) that are marketed as one ecosystem rather than as products of a stated owner group. Checkout runs on a separate domain, vmpaccount.com, operated by the same brand. Google Play's data-safety section could not be read for this record: the listing renders through JavaScript and returned no usable content to a plain fetch.
IgnoranceHow much of this did nobody establish?5 fields read · 4 left unknown · 60.0 points of pressure×0.400
Priced from what is missing: 0.31 of the weighted record is established, on a slope of 0.9 under a cap of 0.6, with a posture of 0.0 relieved by 0.4.
Record completenessS08_completeness
31%
derived from the record itself
Warrant canary disciplinealso read by disclosureP07_warrant_canary
unknown
nothing published · recorded as
Computed
×0.053 of a clean record completeness 31%
Where the drop comes from: Ignorance. It is the channel this record's risk is concentrated in — on its own it takes a clean record to ×0.400, and its bar above is filled to that.
Exposure is recorded as medium and the integrity status as unexamined.
Against the rest of the register, this record sits furthest above on Jurisdiction — ×0.902 where the register averages ×0.680 — and furthest below on Ignorance, ×0.400 against ×0.662.
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.
