Eight commitments guiding Vivendur’s product, operations and customer relationships. Each describes a choice we are making and the obligation it creates for our company.
No advertising against them, no analytics upon them, and no sale, licensing, or “anonymized” derivative of them, under any business model, at any price. We will write this into every customer contract as a term with liability attached.
What it costs us: we give up the dominant business model of the consumer internet, permanently.
Wherever cryptography and system design can enforce your control, they must. Where you still have to trust us, we say so in plain language, unprompted.
What it costs us: slower engineering, and marketing copy less absolute than our competitors’.
We will never ship a competing frontier assistant, never rank providers on anything but verifiable practices, never become any provider’s exclusive layer, and never disparage a provider by name.
What it costs us: we forgo the most obvious adjacent product, and any acquisition that would end our neutrality.
Custody, governed disclosure, inference governance, scoped erasure and verifiable records. We distinguish design goals, team-reported prototype checks and results that have independent review. Our status page and evidence register state what remains to be demonstrated.
What it costs us: publishing the remaining gaps alongside our progress.
Where erasure coverage is not established, the interface should say “remove from future use,” not imply that every copy is gone. Any deletion claim must identify its governed records, tracked derivations and treatment of backups and keys. External recipient copies remain outside that scope. Read the erasure boundaries.
What it costs us: awkward, truthful interfaces where others show a satisfying trash can.
We label design goals and team-reported prototype checks as such. Neither is a formal proof, an independent assessment or a production-security guarantee. We will link published security results to their version, scope and limitations, and will not describe planned review as completed.
What it costs us: publishing evidence and limitations before making stronger security claims.
We decline employee monitoring, covert profiling, adtech, data brokerage, and any deployment whose purpose is watching people without their control, including from governments and including when it’s framed as safety. A memory layer without subject control is a surveillance layer.
What it costs us: turning down work that conflicts with this commitment.
Our own operations, from support access to emergency access to changes in policy floors, are designed to run through the same tamper-evident logging we build, verifiable by the customer they affect.
What it costs us: our mistakes are discoverable by design. That is the point.
Hold us to them: azinetemadi@vivendur.com. See where we stand today on our status page.