[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":226},["ShallowReactive",2],{"blog:what-is-a-no-logs-policy":3},{"zh-CN":4,"en":122},{"blocks":5,"faq":106},[6,9,11,13,17,19,22,24,49,52,54,56,59,66,68,71,73,79,82,84,86,88,92,94,97,99,102,104],{"type":7,"html":8},"p","「无日志」这四个字本身没有统一标准，不同服务商写出来的内容可以天差地别。它说的是「服务商承诺不留存哪些记录」，不是「服务商在技术上完全看不到什么」——这两件事经常被混在一起讲，但完全不是一回事。",{"type":7,"html":10},"这篇讲清楚服务商技术上必然会经手什么、无日志政策实际承诺不留存什么，以及怎么读懂一份政策的措辞，而不是只看标题信一句宣传语。",{"type":7,"html":12},"判断一份政策写得是不是认真的，关键看它有没有具体说清楚「不收集」和「不留存」分别指的是哪几项，而不是一句笼统的「我们不记录日志」。",{"type":14,"id":15,"html":16},"h2","bp-technical","服务商技术上能看到什么",{"type":7,"html":18},"要把你的流量送到目的地，服务器在建立连接的那一刻，必然会短暂经手你的连接 IP、连接时间，以及流量的大小——这是路由能工作的前提，不是服务商多此一举，任何一家 VPN，不管政策写得多严格，这一步都绕不过去。无日志政策要回答的真正问题，从来不是「这些信息在传输那一刻存不存在」，而是「经手之后，会不会被写成记录、留存下来，留存多久」。想更完整地了解这条边界，\u003Ca href=\"\u002Fblog\u002Fwhat-data-does-a-vpn-see\u002F\">VPN 服务商能看到你的哪些数据\u003C\u002Fa> 那篇拆解得更细。",{"type":14,"id":20,"html":21},"bp-promise","「无日志」承诺不留存的，通常是这些",{"type":7,"html":23},"一份认真的无日志政策，通常会具体说明下面几类数据各自的处理方式：",{"type":25,"align":26,"head":28,"rows":32},"table",[27,27,27],null,[29,30,31],"数据类别","连接时技术上会经过","「无日志」通常承诺",[33,37,41,45],[34,35,36],"连接时间和时长","会","不写入可追溯到具体账号的长期日志",[38,39,40],"你的真实 IP","会，仅在建立连接那一刻","不与账号关联长期留存",[42,43,44],"具体访问了哪些网站","内容本身被加密后服务商也读不到，但域名信息可能短暂经过","不记录、不留存这一项",[46,47,48],"传输的总流量","会，多用于限速等运营目的","部分服务商保留聚合后的用量数字，但不等于逐条访问记录",{"type":14,"id":50,"html":51},"bp-why","这份政策实际在防什么",{"type":7,"html":53},"没有留存的记录，就没有可以被拿走的东西——这是无日志政策真正起作用的地方，而不是某种抽象的信任表态。服务商自己的服务器被入侵、被要求配合调查，或者内部员工权限管理出问题，这几种情况下，能被翻出来的永远是「已经写下来、存在某个地方」的记录。如果连接日志本来就没有被长期保存，这条链路上就少了一个可能被暴露的环节。",{"type":7,"html":55},"反过来说，一家把日志存了三年的服务商，哪怕平时从来不主动查看，这些记录依然是实际存在的资产——存在的东西，理论上就有被访问、被要求交出、或者被泄露的可能。无日志政策的价值，在于从源头减少这类记录的存在，而不是承诺「绝对没人能看到你」，后者本来就不是任何服务商能给出的保证。",{"type":14,"id":57,"html":58},"bp-read","政策写得含糊，还是写得认真：怎么分辨",{"type":60,"items":61},"list",[62,63,64,65],"具体拆开说明「不收集」和「不留存」分别指哪几项，而不是一句笼统的话糊弄过去。","会说明极端情况下的短期留存——比如刚好在排查故障的那几分钟——而不是宣称「绝对零留存」，那种说法反而更值得怀疑。","政策的更新时间和产品实际功能对得上，不是一份三年前写好、之后再也没人碰过的旧文本——产品加了新功能、换了新的基础设施，政策文本却一字未动，这本身就是个信号。","有些服务商会请第三方对政策的实际执行做审计，读的时候可以留意有没有具体的审计报告或链接，而不是只有一句自我声明。",{"type":67},"downloads",{"type":14,"id":69,"html":70},"bp-limits","「无日志」不等于什么",{"type":7,"html":72},"无日志政策管的是服务商自己这一端的记录，管不了这几件事，读政策的时候一起记住会更实际：",{"type":60,"items":74},[75,76,77,78],"你自己设备上的浏览记录、Cookie、本地缓存——这些和 VPN 服务商完全无关，政策再严格也清不掉设备本地留下的痕迹。","你登录的网站自己的日志——无日志政策约束的是 VPN 这一段，你用账号登录了哪个网站，那个网站自己记不记录，是另一回事。","极端的法律强制要求——不同司法辖区对数据留存有不同规定，政策写的是常规运营下的承诺，不是万能的免责声明。","账号本身的安全——密码强度、有没有开启额外验证，这些和「服务商记不记录」是两条完全独立的防线，无日志政策不会替你把账号护住。",{"type":14,"id":80,"html":81},"bp-vs-technical","承诺不留存，和技术上留不下来，是两个级别",{"type":7,"html":83},"读无日志政策的时候，还有一层区别值得分清楚：政策承诺的「不留存」，和架构设计上「本来就留不下来」，不是同一个级别的保证——前者靠的是信任，后者靠的是设计本身。",{"type":7,"html":85},"「承诺不留存」的意思是，技术上可以记录，只是服务商选择不这么做，写进政策里作为对外的约束。这份约束能不能兑现，取决于服务商自己是不是照做，也取决于有没有人去核实——政策文本本身不会自动执行。「技术上留不下来」是另一种情况：系统的设计从一开始就没有给这条记录留位置，不是「选择不记」，而是「运行方式决定了不会有」。就算有人临时改主意想查，也没有现成的记录可查，因为它从一开始就不存在。",{"type":7,"html":87},"分辨一份政策属于哪一种，看措辞：",{"type":60,"items":89},[90,91],"「我们不会记录」「我们不查看」——说的是承诺，能不能兑现取决于服务商是否照做。","「系统设计为不生成」「不与身份关联存储」——说的是架构本身的限制，通常比单纯的承诺更扎实，但同样需要有人独立核实实际运行确实如此，只是需要相信的对象从「服务商会不会说到做到」，换成了「这份核实本身可不可靠」。",{"type":7,"html":93},"对使用者来说，实际影响体现在法律强制这一类极端情况上：「承诺不留存」在压力下有被改变的可能，「技术上不存在」的记录压根没有东西可以被要求交出。这也是为什么政策的具体措辞值得多花一分钟去读，而不是看到「无日志」三个字就直接跳过。",{"type":14,"id":95,"html":96},"bp-stable","怎么用这份认知，而不是死记条款",{"type":7,"html":98},"与其逐字背政策条款，更实际的做法是先弄清楚自己在担心什么，再对着上面的表格去看政策具体怎么写。担心的是「服务商会不会把我访问的记录卖给广告商」，看的是数据有没有留存和关联；担心的是「这台电脑上的痕迹会不会被别人看到」，那是设备本地的问题，无日志政策管不到，需要另外处理。\u003Ca href=\"\u002Fsecurity\u002F\">快橙\u003C\u002Fa> 执行无日志政策，配合加密保护传输中的内容，但设备本身的安全，还是要靠你自己的使用习惯，比如锁屏密码、共享设备上及时退出账号。加密具体覆盖了传输的哪一段、不覆盖哪一段，\u003Ca href=\"\u002Fblog\u002Fvpn-encryption-basics\u002F\">VPN 加密入门\u003C\u002Fa> 那篇讲得更细。",{"type":14,"id":100,"html":101},"bp-final","总结",{"type":7,"html":103},"「无日志」说的是服务商承诺不留存哪些记录，不是服务商在连接那一刻技术上完全看不到任何东西——分清这两件事，才能真正读懂一份政策在承诺什么，也才知道该拿什么标准去判断它写得认不认真。",{"type":7,"html":105},"读政策时，重点看它有没有具体说清楚「不收集」和「不留存」分别是哪几项，有没有提到极端情况下的短期留存，而不是信一句笼统的宣传语——写得越具体，通常越值得信。想先了解产品整体，\u003Ca href=\"\u002Ffeatures\u002F\">功能介绍\u003C\u002Fa> 有更完整的说明；准备好了，\u003Ca href=\"\u002Forder\u002F\">快橙\u003C\u002Fa> 注册后每天有免费试用时长，先用起来再判断值不值得长期用。",[107,110,113,116,119],{"q":108,"a":109},"「无日志」是不是说服务商完全看不到我在做什么？","不是。建立连接那一刻，服务商在技术上必然会短暂经手你的连接 IP 和流量——这是路由能工作的前提。无日志政策承诺的是不把这些写成长期记录留存，不是从一开始就什么都看不见。",{"q":111,"a":112},"免费 VPN 也写着「无日志」，可信吗？","光看这四个字不能判断。要看政策有没有具体说清楚不收集、不留存的分别是哪几项，还有拿什么方式盈利——免费服务如果不靠订阅赚钱，数据本身就更可能是收入来源。",{"q":114,"a":115},"执法机关要求提供数据，无日志政策还有用吗？","无日志政策管的是常规运营下留不留记录，不是万能免责声明。如果本身没有留存那条记录，自然没有可以提供的东西；但不同司法辖区的强制要求不在政策能承诺的范围内。",{"q":117,"a":118},"怎么判断一份无日志政策写得是否认真？","看它有没有具体拆开说「不收集」和「不留存」分别指哪几项，有没有说明极端情况下的短期留存，而不是一句笼统的自我声明。",{"q":120,"a":121},"快橙的无日志政策具体管的是什么？","管的是连接记录和访问内容不写入长期日志、不与账号关联留存。设备本身的安全习惯、你登录的其他网站自己的记录，不在这份政策的范围内。",{"blocks":123,"faq":210},[124,126,128,130,132,134,136,138,161,163,165,167,169,175,176,178,180,186,188,190,192,194,198,200,202,204,206,208],{"type":7,"html":125},""No logs" has no single standard meaning — what different providers actually write can vary enormously. It's a promise about what a provider doesn't retain, not a claim that it technically can't see anything at all. The two get conflated constantly, and they are not the same thing.",{"type":7,"html":127},"Here's what a provider technically has to handle in passing, what a no-logs policy actually promises not to retain, and how to read a policy's actual wording instead of trusting the headline phrase.",{"type":7,"html":129},"Telling a serious policy from a vague one comes down to one thing: does it specifically spell out what "not collected" and "not retained" each cover, rather than one sweeping line like "we don't keep logs."",{"type":14,"id":15,"html":131},"What a provider can technically see",{"type":7,"html":133},"To get your traffic to its destination at all, a server has to briefly handle your connecting IP, the connection time, and the amount of data passing through at the moment a connection is made — that's simply how routing works, not something a provider does out of excess. Every VPN, no matter how strict its policy, goes through this step. The real question a no-logs policy answers is never "does this information exist for that instant" — it's "does it get written into a record afterward, and for how long." For the fuller picture of that boundary, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fen\u002Fblog\u002Fwhat-data-does-a-vpn-see\u002F\">what data a VPN provider can see\u003C\u002Fa> breaks it down in more depth.",{"type":14,"id":20,"html":135},"What "no logs" usually promises not to retain",{"type":7,"html":137},"A serious no-logs policy usually spells out how each of these categories is actually handled:",{"type":25,"align":139,"head":140,"rows":144},[27,27,27],[141,142,143],"Data category","Technically passes through at connection time","What "no logs" usually promises",[145,149,153,157],[146,147,148],"Connection time and duration","Yes","Not written into a long-term log traceable to an account",[150,151,152],"Your real IP","Yes, only at the moment the connection is made","Not retained long-term tied to an account",[154,155,156],"Which specific sites you visited","The content itself is encrypted and unreadable to the provider, though a hostname may pass through briefly","Not recorded or retained",[158,159,160],"Total data transferred","Yes, mostly for operational purposes like rate limiting","Some providers keep an aggregated usage figure, which is not the same as a per-visit record",{"type":14,"id":50,"html":162},"What this policy actually protects against",{"type":7,"html":164},"A record that was never kept is a record that can't be taken — that's where a no-logs policy actually does its work, rather than being some abstract statement of trust. If a provider's own servers get breached, get compelled to cooperate with an investigation, or an internal access-control mistake happens, what surfaces is always something that was "written down and stored somewhere." If connection logs were never kept long-term in the first place, that's one less thing on the chain that can be exposed.",{"type":7,"html":166},"The flip side: a provider that has kept logs for three years still holds those records as a real, existing asset even if nobody ever actively looks at them — and anything that exists can, in principle, be accessed, demanded, or leaked. The value of a no-logs policy is cutting off that kind of record at the source, not a promise that "no one can ever see you," which was never a guarantee any provider could actually make.",{"type":14,"id":57,"html":168},"Vague policy or a serious one: how to tell",{"type":60,"items":170},[171,172,173,174],"It separately spells out what "not collected" and "not retained" each cover, rather than one vague line that glosses over the difference.","It mentions short-term retention in edge cases — the few minutes spent actively debugging an issue, say — rather than claiming "absolute zero retention," which is actually the more suspicious phrasing.","The policy's last-updated date matches what the product actually does now, rather than being text written three years ago that nobody has touched since.","Some providers commission a third party to audit how the policy is actually enforced. Worth checking whether there's an actual audit report or link, rather than just another self-declared sentence.",{"type":67},{"type":14,"id":69,"html":177},"What "no logs" does not mean",{"type":7,"html":179},"A no-logs policy covers the provider's own side of the record — worth keeping in mind while reading one. It does not cover:",{"type":60,"items":181},[182,183,184,185],"Browsing history, cookies, and local cache on your own device — none of that has anything to do with the VPN provider, and no policy, however strict, can clear traces left locally on your device.","The logs kept by the sites you log into — a no-logs policy governs the VPN leg only; whether a site you signed into keeps its own records is a separate matter entirely.","Extreme legal compulsion — different jurisdictions have different data-retention requirements, and a policy describes a promise under normal operations, not a blanket shield against everything.","The security of the account itself — password strength and whether extra verification is turned on are a completely separate line of defense from "does the provider keep records." A no-logs policy won't secure your account for you.",{"type":14,"id":80,"html":187},"A promise not to keep records, and a system that structurally can't, are two different levels",{"type":7,"html":189},"Reading a no-logs policy, there's one more distinction worth separating out: a policy's promise "not to retain" something, and an architecture where a record "structurally never exists," are not the same level of guarantee — one rests on trust, the other rests on the design itself.",{"type":7,"html":191},""Promising not to retain" means the technical capability to log is there, and the provider simply chooses not to use it, writing that choice into a policy as a public commitment. Whether that commitment holds depends on the provider actually following it, and on someone checking that they do — a policy document doesn't enforce itself. "Structurally can't retain it" is a different case: the system's design never left room for that record to exist in the first place. It isn't "chose not to log it," it's "the way it runs means there was never anything to log." Even if someone changed their mind and wanted to look, there's no existing record to find, because none was ever created.",{"type":7,"html":193},"Telling the two apart comes down to wording:",{"type":60,"items":195},[196,197],""We don't log this" or "we don't look at this" — a promise, and whether it holds depends on the provider actually following it.",""The system is designed so this is never generated" or "never stored tied to an identity" — a limit built into the architecture, usually firmer than a promise alone, though it still needs someone to independently verify it actually runs that way. What changes is what's being trusted: not "will the provider keep its word," but "is this verification itself reliable."",{"type":7,"html":199},"For a user, the practical difference shows up in the extreme case of legal compulsion: a promise not to retain something can, under pressure, be changed. A record that structurally never existed has nothing that can be handed over, because there was never anything to demand. That's exactly why a policy's specific wording is worth the extra minute to read, rather than skipping past it the moment the words "no logs" appear.",{"type":14,"id":95,"html":201},"Using this, instead of memorizing clauses",{"type":7,"html":203},"Rather than memorizing a policy word for word, it's more useful to work out what you're actually worried about first, then check the table above against what the policy actually says. Worried that "the provider might sell my browsing records to advertisers" — look at whether data gets retained and tied to you. Worried that "someone else might see traces left on this computer" — that's a local device issue a no-logs policy simply doesn't reach, and needs handling separately. \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fen\u002Fsecurity\u002F\">FastOrange\u003C\u002Fa> runs a no-logs policy and pairs it with encryption to protect content in transit, but the security of the device itself still comes down to your own habits — a lock screen passcode, signing out promptly on a shared device. For exactly which stretch of the trip encryption covers and which it doesn't, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fen\u002Fblog\u002Fvpn-encryption-basics\u002F\">an introduction to VPN encryption\u003C\u002Fa> goes into that in more depth.",{"type":14,"id":100,"html":205},"In summary",{"type":7,"html":207},""No logs" is a promise about what a provider doesn't retain, not a claim that it technically can't see anything at all the moment a connection is made. Keeping those two apart is what lets you actually read what a policy is promising, and gives you a standard for judging whether it's written seriously.",{"type":7,"html":209},"When reading a policy, look for whether it specifically spells out what's "not collected" versus "not retained," and whether it mentions short-term retention in edge cases, rather than trusting one sweeping marketing line — the more specific it is, the more it's usually worth trusting. To see the product as a whole first, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fen\u002Ffeatures\u002F\">the features overview\u003C\u002Fa> has the fuller picture; when you're ready, \u003Ca href=\"\u002Fen\u002Forder\u002F\">FastOrange\u003C\u002Fa> gives every registered account free trial time daily, so you can try it before deciding whether it's worth keeping long-term.",[211,214,217,220,223],{"q":212,"a":213},"Does "no logs" mean the provider can't see what I'm doing at all?","No. At the moment a connection is made, a provider technically has to briefly handle your connecting IP and traffic — that's how routing works at all. A no-logs policy promises not to write that into a long-term record, not that nothing was ever visible in the first place.",{"q":215,"a":216},"A free VPN also says "no logs." Is that believable?","The label alone doesn't tell you much. Check whether the policy spells out exactly what isn't collected versus not retained, and how the service actually makes money — a free service not funded by subscriptions makes your data itself a more likely revenue source.",{"q":218,"a":219},"If law enforcement demands data, does a no-logs policy still matter?","A no-logs policy is about whether a record exists during normal operation, not a blanket shield. If the record was never kept, there's nothing to hand over — but what different jurisdictions can legally compel is outside what any policy can promise.",{"q":221,"a":222},"How do I tell a serious no-logs policy from a vague one?","Look for whether it separately spells out what isn't collected versus not retained, and whether it mentions short-term retention in edge cases, rather than one sweeping self-declared line.",{"q":224,"a":225},"What does FastOrange's no-logs policy specifically cover?","It covers connection records and browsing content not being written into long-term logs or tied to an account. Your device's own security habits, and the logs kept by other sites you log into, are outside what this policy covers.",1793918312075]