Primary sources first
We prefer official product documentation, contracts, provider security pages, certificates, and attestations. Secondary sources provide context but do not replace primary evidence.
Editorial standard
Claims should stand up to scrutiny.
Our content separates product facts, infrastructure evidence, provider statements, and editorial assessment. Critical claims are published with scope, source, and review date.
The standard behind our content.
Comparisons with context
Comparisons disclose their date and sources. Features, prices, regions, and retention can change. We distinguish documented facts from editorial assessment and avoid unsupported superlatives.
Scope before a guarantee
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. Provider and processing region are documented separately per route; infrastructure evidence is not a product certification.
Review and corrections
Critical pages display their review status. When we receive reliable evidence, we review the statement, correct it, and update its review date. Send corrections to privacy@lurus.ai.
Ownership and review status
- Responsible team
- Lurus Editorial & Compliance
- Standard last reviewed
This date refers to the editorial standard, not to the review of every linked page.
Report a correction
Please include the page URL, the statement in question, and a reliable source.
Report a correctionYour code stays yours.
Source code and request context are processed with Zero Data Retention. No use for model training. Providers and processing regions are disclosed transparently.
See privacy and processing detailsCheck the claims in context.
Explore the Trust Center and the comparison pages for scope, sources, and documented product facts.