What needs protection before sync?
The security paper identifies client behavior, protected vault material, and the data path as questions that need current engineering evidence.
The sensitive parts of a household plan deserve more than a reassuring label. The working security note marks the evidence a current technical review must establish and the decisions a person should still be able to understand.
This review frame separates a household record from service operations so the final technical paper can state exactly what is protected, what metadata exists, and where the product still depends on people or systems.
Conceptual review frame only. It is not a protocol diagram, a product behavior claim, or a substitute for current technical evidence.
A good security page makes it easier to understand the system without pretending that every risk disappears.
The security paper identifies client behavior, protected vault material, and the data path as questions that need current engineering evidence.
Account and operational metadata are not automatically the same as vault content. The distinction belongs in the public documentation.
Client version, deployment, recovery design, account behavior, and release policy all matter alongside cryptography.
A public security posture is only useful when the words, policies, and implementation remain aligned. That is the standard this site is being built to meet.
We describe a protection boundary and its limits. We do not turn a design goal into an absolute promise.
Technical details, product policies, and legal terms should agree with one another and remain easy to find.
No certification, audit, or compliance badge appears here until there is current, publishable evidence behind it.
Find the current security documentation, review the privacy policy, or ask the team a direct question.