Vannus / Catalog / Proton Lumo

Proton Lumo

Vannus records that this vendor routes across several model providers — not captured by one. Every finding below is quoted to the vendor’s own document, or marked not disclosed where the vendor publishes nothing.

Determination
Contracts with Proton AG (Switzerland), under a governing law that depends on where the customer is based and whether it is a business or a consumer.
Vannus has not established whether a US parent controls this entity, so US reach is not established either way. The LEI record reports no consolidating parent filed (NON_CONSOLIDATING, [2026-09-12]).
proton.me · read 2026-07-29
read from terms of service

AI assistant from Proton, built by the team behind Proton Mail and Proton VPN. The page footer names 'Proton AG, Route de la Galaise 32, 1228 Plan-les-Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland'.

AI, privacy, productivity
What the vendor's own documentation says
The models we’re using currently are Qwen 3.5, GLM 5.2, Image-Turbo, and FireRed-Image-Edit-1.1.
proton.me ↗ Vendor-sourcedQuote re-checked 14 Sep 2026
Who controls it
US corporate controlNot established — the vendor's own terms name no US contracting entity, and no source establishes its parent either way · clause re-checked 17 Sep 2026
Contracting entityProton AG
Governing lawUnder a governing law that depends on where the customer is based and whether it is a business or a consumer
Trains on your dataNo — on the vendor's default plan

This page gives the finding and links the document it comes from. The AI Subprocessor Jurisdiction Report ($299) quotes the exact clause for every vendor in your stack, dated, in one document you can hand to an auditor.

Training and retention posture varies by plan. What we publish above describes the vendor’s default plan; enterprise, team and API agreements frequently differ, often materially, and a contract can override the published default entirely. Check your own plan and contract before relying on this row.

On U.S. CLOUD Act reach specifically: the statute reaches a provider subject to U.S. jurisdiction over data in its possession, custody or control. Corporate control is a strong indicator of that and it is what we can evidence from published documents — but it is not the whole test. A company founded outside the U.S. can still contract through a U.S. entity or run substantial U.S. operations. Treat this as a starting point for your own review, not a legal determination, and take advice on anything that matters.

Signals on file
Origin
Switzerland

The vendor's published or catalog-recorded posture — the concrete facts this entry is built from. A full audit verifies each against the vendor's current documentation.

Compliance the vendor states
GDPR

Taken from the vendor’s own published material. Vannus does not hold these reports and has not reviewed their scope or dates — ask the vendor for the current report before relying on any of them.

How this entry is set

Vannus records, from the vendor's own published documents, the legal entity a customer contracts with, the country that entity sits in, and the governing law of its terms — and whether the vendor runs its own model or resells someone else's. Each finding is quoted to its source and dated, or marked not disclosed where the vendor publishes nothing. No paid placements — affiliate status is walled off from the record, enforced by a test in the build. See the methodology →

Related tools we record
Visit Proton Lumo ↗ Check your whole stack →