Can you own it?
This page is a projection of the one entry record, the Use & modify and Transparency factors that Assess covers. The full verdict is set by all four factors together, floor-weighted so the weakest caps the whole.
- AssessUse & modify + Transparency
- ImplementData control + Reliability
- UseReliability
- SupportTransparency
Data governance - retention, ZDR & training
This is the entry's central finding, and an independent Cowork browser session (2026-09-21) CONFIRMED it VERBATIM. Nebius' marketing-adjacent Legal Quick Guide states "we do not use your content to train, fine-tune or improve any AI models - ours or third parties'." But the binding Token Factory Terms of Service, Sec 7 (independently re-read) states Nebius collects and processes Input/Output data by default and uses it to train its own smaller "Speculative Decoding" models, unless the customer actively opts out (via an onboarding form or by emailing support). Zero Data Retention is an account-level opt-in, not the default - and the Legal Quick Guide itself warns that enabling it "may impact the level of service provided (e.g., inference speed)." This finding survives independent human-grade verification, not just an automated read - it is real.
Data & IP ownership
Terms of Service Sec 10(b)/(c) (independently re-read): the customer "holds exclusive ownership of all rights, titles, and interests... to Customer's Content," subject to the Sec 7 operational licence described above. Sec 7 separately reserves the right to "remove, screen, or delete any of Your Inputs and Outputs at any time, for any reason, and without notice." Neither the general Master Agreement confidentiality clause (Sec 18) nor Sec 7 names Customer Content as the customer's own Confidential Information; the DPA's processor-confidentiality duty is scoped to Customer Personal Data, not Customer Content generally. Sub-processors are fully disclosed: approximately 21 named entities (corrected from an earlier ~24; exact recount recommended) with a 15-day advance-notice commitment.
Residency & sovereignty
Correction: only two EU regions are public/self-serve - Finland (eu-north1) and France
(eu-west1). Spain (eu-south1) and Iceland (eu-north2), plus a second French region (eu-west2),
are private - "available only to the users who already have deployments there," not
self-serve. An earlier draft claimed four public EU regions; an independent browser read of the
regions page corrected this. The DPA documents region pinning for AI Cloud and Token Factory
dedicated endpoints, but for shared/public Token Factory endpoints - the self-serve,
majority-usage surface - processing location "may vary." A US sub-processor entity (Nebius
Inc.) and a us-central1 public region exist alongside the Netherlands-domiciled parent (Nebius
Group N.V.), creating plausible CLOUD Act exposure that no primary document addresses explicitly.
Compliance & attestations
Nebius' Trust Center and SOC 2 blog post (independently browser-read, verbatim) document SOC 2 Type II audited by a NAMED firm - Deloitte - covering HIPAA, and an ISO 27001 scope statement that explicitly names "AI Studio" (Token Factory itself, not just the company generally) alongside AI Cloud and TractoAI. A GDPR DPA and CSA STAR Level 1 are also documented. The underlying SOC 2 report still requires an NDA and discloses no public audit dates - compliance remains publisher-grade + named auditor, short of an independently-dated public certificate. FedRAMP is not offered.
Security controls
The Legal Quick Guide references encryption at rest and in transit and need-to-know access management, and dedicated endpoints are marketed as single-tenant/isolated. This language is generic - no cipher specifics, no independently confirmed penetration-testing programme, and no public bug-bounty were found. SOC 2 Type II implies some independently tested operational controls, but that is not the same as a named pen-test disclosure.
Pricing & cost model
Public per-token pricing is verified directly and on re-check for several live public endpoints - DeepSeek-V4-Pro at $1.75/$3.50 per 1M tokens, gpt-oss-120b at $0.15/$0.60, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct at $0.13/$0.40. Correction: a prior claim that several flagship models (Kimi-K2-Instruct, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct, GLM-4.5) showed "Public endpoint: Not available" is not supported on re-check - those specific named versions have simply been superseded by newer catalogue entries (ordinary churn), not gated behind a dedicated tier. The dedicated tier's underlying per-replica/GPU-hour rate remains not disclosed, described only as varying "depending on your custom contract or work order," and the full authoritative live price list is auth-gated.
Reliability posture
Correction: there is NO committed inference SLA at all. A prior draft claimed a real contractual SLA existed with only the exact number unconfirmed - this overstated it. The master SLA page (independently re-read) delegates entirely to per-service sub-pages; that index lists exactly seven services (Compute Cloud, Managed Kubernetes, Managed MLflow, Managed PostgreSQL, Object Storage, Standalone Applications, Virtual Private Cloud) and none of them is inference, Token Factory, or AI Studio. The marketed 99.9% figure is confirmed marketing-only. A public status page (independently confirmed) shows a dedicated Token Factory component as Operational, with three brief, resolved incidents in the Sep 9-17 2026 window.
How this scores
The ownership factors this domain covers, drawn from the one entry record.
Use and modify freelyCan you use it freely and leave without lock-in?
StrongAn OpenAI-compatible API over a predominantly open-weight catalogue keeps served checkpoints portable, and the customer retains ownership of Customer Content subject to Nebius' operational licence. CORRECTED 2026-09-21: a prior claim that many flagship models are dedicated-endpoint-only is not supported - they are publicly served per-token, simply superseded by newer catalogue entries.
TransparencyAre the binding terms published, legible and independently checkable?
ModerateThe Terms of Service, DPA, Legal Quick Guide and regions/SLA pages are legible and were independently browser-read - but they contain a CONFIRMED internal discrepancy (marketing says no training on content; the binding Terms say otherwise, opt-out only), and the dedicated-tier per-GPU-hour rate is not publicly disclosed. An earlier draft also overstated the public EU-region count (four, corrected to two) and the existence of a committed inference SLA (corrected to none) - both now fixed, but the overstatement itself is a data point about how carefully marketing-adjacent claims need checking here.
Sources
The same evidence records as the entry sheet. Read means the text was verified; unverified means it is known to exist but not yet read.