Dutch law enforcement recently seized a Windscribe VPN server, prompting a swift response from the company. While the circumstances remain unclear—authorities did not issue a warrant or provide a specific reason for the seizure—Windscribe maintains that user privacy remains unaffected. The incident highlights the inherent tension between VPN providers, law enforcement, and the evolving landscape of digital privacy.
RAM-Only Infrastructure: A Built-In Defense
Windscribe operates on a RAM-only server infrastructure. This means all data stored on the server is volatile and automatically erased when the power is cut or the server is rebooted. In this case, Dutch authorities took the server offline, effectively ensuring no user data could be recovered. As CEO Yegor Sak explained, “the only thing the authorities will find is a stock Ubuntu install.”
This approach is a deliberate defense against forced data extraction. Unlike traditional servers that store information on hard drives, RAM-only systems leave no persistent record of user activity. This makes them resistant to forensic analysis, even with sophisticated memory dumps.
No Logs Policy: A Core Principle
Windscribe’s privacy policy reinforces this protection by stating the company does not keep logs of user source IPs, VPN session histories, or browsing data. Without these records, there is nothing for authorities to retrieve from the server.
However, verifying “no-logs” claims is notoriously difficult. Third-party audits, such as Windscribe’s regular assessments since 2021 (including one published in summer 2024 focusing on FreshScribe), offer some level of assurance. Still, these audits are not foolproof.
Real-World Tests: Legal Battles and Proof of Concept
The most compelling evidence of Windscribe’s no-logs policy comes from real-world legal challenges. In 2023, Greek authorities accused Sak of “illegal access to information systems” after a user misused the VPN to conduct spam emails. Windscribe successfully defended itself by demonstrating it had no data to hand over.
As Sak stated, “you cannot hand over what you do not have.” This incident underscores the effectiveness of a true no-logs approach. Law enforcement agencies reportedly submit multiple requests for data each month, all of which Windscribe denies. In this latest case, Dutch authorities bypassed the request process entirely by seizing the server directly.
“The only way to get the logs is to take the server yourself,” Windscribe stated on X.
This highlights a growing trend: law enforcement resorting to direct action when standard requests fail.
Conclusion: The seizure of Windscribe’s server proves that aggressive measures may be taken to force access to user data. The fact that authorities found nothing useful confirms that RAM-only infrastructure and strict no-logs policies can effectively protect user privacy in practice. The incident raises questions about the limits of surveillance, the role of VPNs in digital freedom, and the lengths to which governments will go to bypass privacy protections.
