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
41 24 left unknown, 2 not applicable
Completeness
60% the share the model could weigh
Citations
53 across 11 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 · 14 hereB weighs 0.85 · 39 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-log audit is old and covers a fraction of the fleet. The only independent audit is Leviathan Security's 2018 no-log assessment, commissioned when the operator was still Golden Frog. It found and fixed real logging leaks on retest, but it inspected two sample production servers, not the whole fleet, and nothing has re-verified retention since ownership passed to Certida LLC in 2023.
Device identifiers and site trackers are unread. Google Play's data-safety form declares "Device or other IDs" without naming which kind, and the provider's privacy notice does not spell out advertising-ID handling; the app-side SDK finding (Mixpanel, Adjust) and the site-tracker field both rest on evidence from 2018 or no evidence at all.
the rest of what is open — 105 more words
Payment methods, signup friction and checkout flow were not opened. The plan selector on the pricing page was read, but the payment step beyond it — card only, PayPal, crypto, cash — and whether an account needs more than an email were not checked this session.
Pressure history rests on absence, not on a document. No seizure or court record, and nothing showing that user data was ever handed over, was found for VyprVPN or its current or former operator — that is a search that came up empty, not a document that says nothing happened; no transparency report or warrant canary was found either.
On the record as a whole.
Certida LLC's support FAQ (updated 2023-08-31) is the only document naming the ownership change from Golden Frog, GmbH (Switzerland) to Certida LLC (Austin, TX); it gives no exact transition date, so M16_control_since is dated to the month of that FAQ update rather than a confirmed event date.
Golden Frog's own site (goldenfrog.com) is still live with a 2021 copyright line and unchanged Swiss-entity language, which is stale rather than a second, contradicting claim. Certida's other named businesses are Usenet providers (Giganews, Supernews), not VPN or ad-tech brands, so M10_owner_other_business is filed as other.
A third-party ownership-mapping site claimed Certida also operates ZenMate; ZenMate's own privacy policy names ZenGuard GmbH with Cyberghost SRL, not Certida, so that claim was not carried into the record.
JurisdictionCan someone compel what exists, without the provider getting a say?5 fields read · 2 left unknown · 66.0 points of pressure×0.340
Where the company sits 0.6, where its owner sits 0.45, the exits it offers 0.15, the gag-order regime 0.05 — one circumstance, priced once rather than compounded.
Computed
×0.059 of a clean record completeness 60%
Where the drop comes from: Jurisdiction. It is the channel this record's risk is concentrated in — on its own it takes a clean record to ×0.340, and its bar above is filled to that.
Exposure is recorded as medium and the integrity status as clean.
Against the rest of the register, this record sits furthest above on Integrity — ×0.940 where the register averages ×0.658 — and furthest below on Jurisdiction, ×0.340 against ×0.680.
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.
