Editorial standard

Traceable content instead of blanket promises

Our content separates product facts, infrastructure evidence, provider statements, and editorial assessment. Critical claims are published with scope, source, and review date.

Source hierarchy

We prefer primary sources: official product documentation, contracts, provider security pages, certificates, and attestations. Secondary sources provide context but do not replace primary evidence.

Comparison standard

Comparisons disclose their date and sources. Features, prices, regions, and retention can change. We distinguish documented facts from editorial assessment and avoid unsupported superlatives.

Compliance and privacy

We do not provide legal advice. Product-wide guarantees such as GDPR compliance, Zero Data Retention, and no training on customer data are identified clearly. Route-specific facts such as provider and processing region are documented separately; infrastructure evidence is not presented as a product certification.

Review and corrections

Critical pages display their review status. When we receive reliable evidence, we review the affected statement, correct it, and update the review date. Corrections can be submitted to privacy@lurus.ai.

Ownership and status

Owner: Lurus Editorial & Compliance

Standard last reviewed: July 26, 2026

Report a correction