Surfshark operates under Nord Security from the Netherlands. PureVPN is registered in BVI under GZ Systems, a Hong Kong-based parent, and provided user logs to the FBI in 2017 while claiming a no-logs policy — since followed by independent audit coverage. Both have current audit programs; the audit histories differ.

What you get that PureVPN doesn't offer

Unlimited simultaneous connections — PureVPN's limit is broader than most but still bounded. Continuous audit coverage without a preceding incident. Nord Security ownership vs GZ Systems, a Hong Kong-based parent. Netherlands registration vs PureVPN's BVI under a different corporate structure. CleanWeb ad and tracker blocking. Security feature scope is more developed. Streaming access maintained as a product commitment.

What you give up

PureVPN provides port forwarding; Surfshark does not. PureVPN's long-term value position is more accommodating. PureVPN's current audit covers its no-logs practices going forward.

What you get that Surfshark doesn't offer

Port forwarding included. More accommodating long-term value position. BVI jurisdiction. Current independent audit coverage of the no-logs policy.

What you give up

The 2017 logging incident: PureVPN provided user connection records to law enforcement while stating a no-logs policy. The current audit addresses practices going forward. GZ Systems is a Hong Kong-based parent — a different corporate jurisdiction consideration than Nord Security. Unlimited connections vs PureVPN's cap. Surfshark's security feature scope, streaming access, and CleanWeb blocking are not replicated. Netherlands carries EU data-retention obligations, but the 2017 incident is a structural fact that predates the current audit program.