Editorial policy

Last updated 23 September 2026 · Responsible editor: Anthony Martinez

zlatenis.online is an advertising-funded site that writes about consumer security software. That funding model creates an obvious conflict of interest. This page sets out how we manage it, what we will not do, and how to get an error corrected.

Who writes here

Articles are written and signed by Anthony Martinez, responsible editor and director of publication, working for ClothesTrade s.r.o. (company number 23641703, registered at Vosmíkových 930/12, Libeň, 180 00 Praha 8). Every article carries a byline and a publication date. We do not publish anonymous articles and we do not publish under invented author names.

We are not security researchers and we do not present ourselves as any kind of certifying authority. We read primary documentation, we read the published methodology and results of the independent testing laboratories, and we explain what we find in ordinary language. Where a question needs laboratory work to answer, we point you at the laboratories rather than pretending we did the work.

How we establish and source facts

• Vendor documentation first. Feature composition, licence scope and subscription terms come from the vendor’s own product pages, support articles and subscription agreement — not from a press release and not from another affiliate site.
• Independent laboratories for performance claims. Where detection or system-impact quality is discussed, the reference points are AV-TEST, AV-Comparatives and SE Labs, which publish their methodology alongside their results.
• Named sources, linked. Sources are listed at the foot of each article with a link, so you can check them.
• Hedging where we are unsure. If we cannot verify something, we say so in the text rather than rounding it up into a confident statement. Phrases such as “varies by region” or “at the time of writing” are used literally, not as filler.
• Deliberate omission of volatile figures. We generally do not print prices, device counts, storage allowances or lab scores, because they change faster than we can maintain them and a stale number is a misleading number.
• The vendor prevails. Every article states that where our description diverges from the publisher’s own current information, the publisher’s information prevails.

How the site is funded

Entirely by affiliate commission. When a reader follows a link marked “partner link” and buys, the retailer or its affiliate network pays us a percentage. The reader pays the ordinary price; there is no surcharge and no discount attached to using our link. We sell no subscriptions, we hold no inventory, and we have no other revenue stream. Traffic to this site is bought through advertising platforms, which is why you may have arrived here from an advertisement.

The complete arrangement is set out on the affiliate disclosure page.

Advertiser independence

• No advertiser, network or vendor sees an article before it is published.
• No advertiser has any right of review, approval or veto over our text.
• No payment has been accepted for a positive assessment, a placement or a ranking position, and we do not accept such offers.
• Nobody has supplied us with copy to publish as our own. If a vendor ever did supply material we used, it would be labelled as vendor material at the point of use.
• Critical statements stay in even when they are commercially inconvenient. The article on this site tells readers that the advertised product does not include the VPN many of them came looking for, and tells them the higher tier may be the better purchase. That is the test of whether a policy like this one means anything.

What we refuse to do

These are absolute, not aspirational:

• No invented testimonials. We publish no reader stories, no “reader-submitted” experiences, no customer quotes and no case studies. Nothing on this site is framed as somebody’s personal experience. Earlier versions of this site used a “reader story” framing; it has been removed.
• No invented ratings. No star ratings, no scores out of ten, no “editor’s choice” badge, no award graphics. We did not run the tests, so we do not award the marks.
• No artificial urgency. No countdown timers, no “offer ends tonight”, no fake stock levels, no “X people are viewing this”, no manufactured deadline of any kind.
• No guaranteed-result claims. No security product makes anyone safe, and we will not write that one does. We also avoid the fear-first framing the category is prone to.
• No fabricated statistics or specifications. If we cannot source a number, we do not print it. Our diagrams say explicitly when a bar or a shape illustrates a principle rather than measured data.
• No unlabelled commercial links. Every commercial link is visibly marked and carries rel="sponsored nofollow noopener".
• No borrowed brand imagery. No product screenshots, no logos, no stock photographs. Every illustration on this site is an original diagram drawn for it.
• No tracking of readers. Covered in full in the cookie policy.

How commercial content is labelled

Four things happen on every page carrying a commercial link, and they are meant to be redundant with one another:

1. A disclosure bar at the very top of the page, above everything else.
2. A disclosure box immediately after the headline, before any promotional content.
3. A visible “partner link” label on every button, including in the sidebar.
4. A note under every call to action stating that we earn a commission and that it costs the reader nothing extra.

No commercial link appears anywhere on a page before the disclosure that explains it.

Corrections

We will get things wrong. Software changes, regional terms differ, and we are working from documentation rather than from a licence in hand.

To report an error, email info@zlatenis.online with the page address and, if you can, a link to the source that shows the correct position. You do not need to explain who you are.

What we do with it. We acknowledge within five working days. We check the claim against primary documentation. If it is right, we fix the page and update its “last updated” date. Where the error was material — anything that could have changed a reader’s purchasing decision — we add a dated correction note to the article itself rather than editing silently. Minor fixes such as typography are made without a note. If we conclude the claim is wrong, we write back and say why.

Right of reply. A vendor or advertiser who believes we have described their product unfairly can write to the same address and we will publish a correction or a stated response where it is warranted. That is a separate process from the commercial relationship, and a commercial relationship does not buy an edit.

No corrections have been issued since this policy took effect on 23 September 2026. Any that are issued will be noted on the article concerned.