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
32 34 left unknown, 1 not applicable
Completeness
51% the share the model could weigh
Citations
55 across 16 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 · 55 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.
Server hardware ownership. The site markets 'dedicated bare metal VPN servers' and says it has 'customised existing hardware', without ever stating outright whether the fleet is owned by ZoogVPN or leased from third-party datacentres; C08 and the C12 device-identifier floor both stay unknown as a result.
No independent audit found. No page, blog post or sitemap entry anywhere on the domain mentions a no-logs audit, a penetration test, or an open-source client release; the whole VERIFY block and C02 (RAM-only servers) rest on nothing but the provider's own unaudited, unverifiable claim of a strict no-log policy.
the rest of what is open — 158 more words
Warrant canary uses a rolling 'as of' date. The canary reads 'As of September 2026' — precisely the current month at the time of reading — with no separate 'last verified' timestamp anywhere on the page, so it cannot be told apart from an evergreen template that silently advances every month rather than a figure someone actually re-checks.
Device limit contradicts itself on the same page. The pricing page's plan-comparison table and the features page both state '10 devices' for the Premium tier, while a marketing bullet higher up on that same pricing page claims 'Unlimited devices' for the identical plan; U10 records the specific, repeated figure over the vaguer headline claim.
Ultimate beneficial owner not named. The company (Zoog Services IKE, registered in Patras, Greece) is identified with a street address and a phone number, but no founder or individual owner is named anywhere on the site, so M09_owner_ultimate and M11_owner_jurisdiction both stay unknown rather than guessed.
On the record as a whole.
Marketing copy gives inconsistent total server-country counts across pages of the same site ('35+', '50+', '55+'); U02 is filled from the location-map data embedded in the network page (78 distinct countries) rather than any of these headline numbers.
RetentionDoes a record exist that links traffic to a person, and who checked?13 fields read · 11 left unknown · 55.0 points of pressure×0.450
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 (0.0), at credence 0.0 from the audit and 0.2975 from how the provider engaged, against a severity of 0.08 for what is actually retained.
How the report is publishedV02_report_publication
unknown
nothing published · recorded as asserted
Computed
×0.112 of a clean record completeness 51%
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 ×0.450, 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 — ×0.894 where the register averages ×0.680 — and furthest below on Hygiene, ×0.720 against ×0.808.
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.
