Is SingLinkVPN Safe? Desktop 2.5 Security Audit and No-Logs Verification

The SingLinkVPN desktop 2.5 series has now completed an independent security audit and ongoing version-level security verification.

As of August 24, 2026, the latest security audit records published by VPNTestor Platform / Openscore VPN cover macOS 2.5.7, Windows 2.5.8, and related new-protocol security verification, with the latest complete report rated:

100 / 100

Critical risks: 0

High risks: 0

Medium risks: 0

Low risks: 0

Audit result: Fully passed. (VPN Testor)

For a VPN, however, what truly matters is not the number “100,” but this:

Where exactly did SingLinkVPN pass security testing?

In simple terms, the independent audit has verified desktop 2.5 security in the following areas:

VPN connections do not leave incorrect routes after abnormal disconnections or network changes

No consistently reproducible DNS request leaks were found

No consistently reproducible IPv4 or IPv6 leaks were found

No consistently reproducible WebRTC privacy leaks were found

Unauthorized account or API requests cannot obtain internal VPN data

No local activity records such as browsing content or DNS query content were found in the client

Installers, digital signatures, and the update chain were included in security checks

A previously identified issue was fixed, and independent retesting confirmed that it could no longer be reproduced. (VPN Testor)

These are the parts of this security audit that genuinely deserve attention.

PC 2.5.8 Real-World Speed Test Video

This test video published by SingLinkVPN records a result of 532 Mbps while Windows 2.5.8 used the Sola protocol to connect to a Taiwan node. It is one real-world performance sample, not a promise that every user, region, internet service provider, time period, or node will obtain the same speed; actual performance remains affected by local broadband, device performance, route conditions, server load, and the speed-test method.

1. Why Can SingLinkVPN Say That Desktop 2.5 Has Been Security-Verified?

To determine whether a VPN is safe, the first question is whether it solves the most basic problem:

When the VPN says “Connected,” is the user’s network traffic actually traveling through the secure path?

Independent security testing did not simply open the client, connect to one node, and declare a pass after seeing “Connected.”

The tests included:

• Establishing a VPN tunnel normally;

• Manually disconnecting the VPN;

• A sudden VPN server disconnection;

• Automatic reconnection;

• Switching from Wi-Fi to a mobile network;

• A brief network interruption;

• Device sleep and wake;

• Force-closing the client;

• Route creation and cleanup. (VPN Testor)

One particularly important test was:

Switching from Wi-Fi to another network must not cause sustained exposure of traffic that is not protected by the VPN.

If the server disconnects unexpectedly, the client must:

Safely stop the connection or re-establish the VPN tunnel.

In other words, the independent review did not ask only:

“Can it connect?”

It also asked:

If the connection fails, could the user lose protection without realizing it?

2. DNS Leak Test: Do DNS Requests Bypass the VPN When Visiting Websites?

DNS leakage is one of the most common privacy risks for a VPN.

Even if the public IP has changed to the VPN server’s IP, the local network may still know which domains the user is querying if DNS requests continue to go directly to the local internet service provider.

The independent testing therefore specifically checked:

Whether DNS requests bypassed the designated secure path.

The formal test standard required:

DNS requests must not bypass the secure path designated by the VPN. (VPN Testor)

The final security audit conclusion was:

No consistently reproducible DNS leaks were found. (VPN Testor)

This means no stable, reproducible DNS-bypass issue was found in the test versions and environments listed in the report.

3. Can the Real IP Address Leak?

One of a VPN’s most basic security goals is to prevent the user’s real public egress from remaining exposed through another network protocol after the VPN connects.

The audit therefore checked separately:

IPv4

and:

IPv6.

The IPv4 test required:

The public egress IP should match the VPN location selected by the user.

The IPv6 test required:

IPv6 traffic must not bypass the VPN. (VPN Testor)

The final report found no consistently reproducible:

IPv4 leaks

or:

IPv6 leaks. (VPN Testor)

This is extremely important.

Even if IPv4 works correctly, a real network identity can still be exposed if IPv6 goes directly through the local network.

4. Can WebRTC Expose Local Network Information?

In some environments, a browser’s WebRTC functionality may reveal local network addresses or other connection information.

VPN security testing therefore cannot check only the public IP.

This independent security audit also included:

WebRTC leak testing.

The test requirement was:

Local addresses that should remain private must not be exposed by WebRTC. (VPN Testor)

The final audit conclusion was:

No consistently reproducible WebRTC leaks were found. (VPN Testor)

The SingLinkVPN desktop security test therefore did not merely check whether the IP changed.

It covered all of these potential points of network identity exposure:

DNS + IPv4 + IPv6 + WebRTC + routing

at the same time.

5. Why Is Switching Networks Also a Security Issue?

Many VPNs appear to work without problems on a stable home Wi-Fi network.

Problems are more likely to emerge when:

Wi-Fi suddenly disconnects;

Wi-Fi switches to another network;

The network loses its signal for several seconds;

The VPN server disconnects unexpectedly.

If the client handles the event incorrectly, this can happen:

The VPN has stopped working, but some traffic continues to go directly through the local network.

This security audit specifically covered:

• Residential IPv4 broadband;

• IPv4/IPv6 dual-stack networks;

• 4G;

• 5G;

• Public Wi-Fi;

• Switching between Wi-Fi and 5G;

• Brief network interruptions;

• Abnormal DNS conditions;

• High-latency and high-packet-loss environments. (VPN Testor)

The test was therefore closer to real usage than running a VPN once on a stable laboratory network.

6. Can Someone Bypass Login to Obtain Internal VPN Data?

VPN security is not limited to network leaks.

Access-control vulnerabilities in accounts, tokens, and APIs can also expose user data or internal VPN configurations.

The independent tests included:

Requests without logging in

Invalid tokens

Expired tokens

Reusing a token after logout

Changing an account identifier

Accessing another user’s account

Unauthorized requests for internal VPN routes

Repeated high-frequency requests

and:

Requests for protected configuration from an unofficial client. (VPN Testor)

The test requirements included:

Unauthenticated requests must be rejected.

Invalid and expired tokens must not continue to work.

A user must not be able to read another person’s account data by changing account parameters.

Unauthorized requests must not obtain internal VPN route data. (VPN Testor)

The final audit also confirmed:

Unauthorized requests cannot obtain internal VPN route data. (VPN Testor)

This security audit therefore protects more than the VPN tunnel.

It also covers:

Account → API → internal configuration

as one complete chain.

7. Does the SingLinkVPN Desktop Client Secretly Save Browsing Records?

This is another issue that users should genuinely care about.

The independent security audit directly checked whether the desktop client locally contained:

• Browsing activity records;

• DNS query records;

• Original IP activity records;

• Error logs;

• Tokens and credentials;

• Diagnostic data;

• Local cache. (VPN Testor)

The test requirements explicitly included:

No browsing content records exist.

No DNS query content records exist.

Unnecessary original IP activity records are not created.

Error logs must not contain tokens, keys, or internal route data.

Diagnostic data must not contain complete network activity content. (VPN Testor)

In the broader data-processing assessment, the independent reviewer also found no evidence that the client actively created:

• Browsing content;

• Browsing history;

• DNS query content;

• Complete network activity;

• Lists of visited websites;

• Original network traffic content. (VPN Testor)

This is especially important:

A VPN should not protect the network while creating another copy of the user’s browsing history locally on the computer.

8. Is the Installed SingLinkVPN Software Official and Intact?

A VPN is software with elevated network privileges.

Security must therefore also address this question:

Has the software been replaced or tampered with, or is it being updated from an untrusted source?

This audit included the following items in its security scope:

Installer integrity

Digital signatures

Update sources

Version-downgrade risk

Third-party dependencies

Hard-coded keys

Debug information in production releases

and:

Installer permissions. (VPN Testor)

The report also retains verification records for official macOS, Windows, and other release files, while continuing to record later 2.5 installer samples, signatures, and security verification results. (VPN Testor)

The official recommendation therefore remains:

Install the software only from the official SingLinkVPN website or an official app store, and do not use third-party modified clients. (VPN Testor)

9. Has SingLinkVPN Ever Found a Security Issue?

Yes.

We believe this is an important part of a security audit that should be disclosed publicly.

In early 2026, SingLinkVPN identified a potential attack surface related to the VPN startup process.

The issue involved the client requesting internal connection configuration and VPN route information from the backend while establishing a connection.

The following controls were then strengthened:

Authentication

Access control

Abnormal request detection

Rate limiting

Internal data isolation

and:

Automated attack protection. (VPN Testor)

The most important question is not:

“Has an issue ever been found?”

It is:

Was it fixed after discovery, and did an independent party verify it again?

VPNTestor subsequently reran the relevant tests.

The result:

The original issue could no longer be reproduced.

At the same time:

No new exploitable security issues introduced by the remediation were found. (VPN Testor)

Compared with simply writing:

“SingLinkVPN has never had a security issue,”

this is more credible.

Real software security should follow this process:

Discover → fix → independent retest → regression test.

10. Why Did the Security Audit Ultimately Score 100/100?

VPNTestor divided the security score into seven main sections:

This audit recorded:

Critical risks: 0

High risks: 0

Medium risks: 0

Low risks: 0

The known VPN startup-process issue was:

Fixed before the formal audit.

Remediation retesting:

Passed.

The final score was therefore:

100 / 100

One clarification is necessary:

100/100 means that all scoring requirements were met within the versions, environments, and test scope listed in the report. It does not mean that vulnerabilities can never appear in any future version.

Security testing must still continue after software updates.

11. Did Security Verification Continue for Desktop 2.5?

Yes.

This is also one of the most important points this article should explain.

In the initial full security audit in July 2026, the tested macOS version belonged to the 2.5 series.

As the desktop client continued to receive updates, the independent party did not simply apply the old report to every new release. It continued adding security verification records. (VPN Testor)

As of August 24, 2026:

macOS 2.5.7 / build 3065

6 / 6 release security checks passed

Windows 2.5.8 / build 3077

All listed version-security items passed

Windows 2.5.8 New-Protocol Security Verification

7 / 7 items passed

These latest results have been consolidated into the:

2026 v2.0 complete signed security report

The final rating remains:

100 / 100

The security logic for desktop 2.5 is therefore not:

It was audited once before, so every future version is safe by default.

It is:

Complete baseline audit + continued security verification for subsequent new versions.

12. If the Client Is Secure, Why Examine “No Logs” Separately?

Because:

A client that does not leak does not mean that the server does not record.

For example, a VPN can fully achieve:

• No DNS leaks;

• No IP leaks;

• No WebRTC leaks;

while the backend still stores:

When a user connected, which node they used, and which website they visited.

Answering this question:

Does SingLinkVPN record users’ network activity?

therefore requires a completely different:

Production-Environment No-Logs Verification

13. What Exactly Does SingLinkVPN’s “No-Logs” Policy Not Record?

On July 29, 2026, VPNTestor conducted an independent read-only verification of SingLinkVPN’s production environment.

The independent party actually checked:

• The central backend;

• Database fields;

• Client and node data reporting;

• VPN node logs;

• DNS handling;

• Cloud services and CDN;

• Database backups;

• Administrator query permissions;

• Automatic cleanup mechanisms. (VPN Testor)

It ultimately found no evidence that SingLinkVPN persistently recorded:

Websites visited by users

Destination domains

Full URLs

DNS queries

Users’ original IP history

History of specific VPN nodes used

Individual VPN connection history

Browsing content

or:

Network communication content. (VPN Testor)

This is what:

Strictly no activity logs

should truly mean.

14. The Most Important Point: It Is Not “Record First, Delete Later”

The no-logs report also verified the actual design of the VPN nodes.

To transmit data in real time, a node naturally needs to know temporarily:

• The current connection;

• Temporary routes;

• Transmission buffers;

• Handshake state.

These, however, are:

Temporary session state in memory.

They are automatically released when the connection ends.

The independent reviewer did not find VPN nodes writing:

• Websites;

• Domains;

• URLs;

• DNS queries;

• Original IP addresses;

• Communication content;

• Node history;

to persistent user activity logs. (VPN Testor)

The important distinction in SingLinkVPN’s current no-logs design is therefore:

It does not record complete user activity first and then delete it several days later.

Instead:

For websites, DNS, original IP addresses, and network activity, the corresponding persistent logs are not created in the first place.

This is one of the most important technical principles of no-logs protection.

15. Can a Backend Administrator Find Out “Which Websites a Particular User Visited”?

The independent party also specifically checked the administrative backend and data-export capabilities.

The report found no evidence that administrators could query or export:

Websites visited by a particular user

DNS queries made by a particular user

A particular user’s full URLs

The specific node history of a particular user

A particular user’s original IP history

A particular user’s browsing or communication content. (VPN Testor)

This is extremely important.

Genuine no-logs protection is not merely:

“We promise that customer support will not look.”

It should mean:

The backend itself has no such user activity logs available to query.

The independent check result was:

Passed. (VPN Testor)

16. Could Logs Secretly Remain in Cloud Servers, the CDN, or Backups?

The no-logs verification did not examine only SingLinkVPN’s central backend.

The independent party also checked:

Cloud services

CDN

and:

Database backups.

No persistent logs capable of identifying or reconstructing users’ VPN activity were found in these systems.

The database backups also did not contain:

• Websites;

• Domains;

• URLs;

• DNS queries;

• Original IP addresses;

• Browsing content;

• Connection history;

or other network activity data. (VPN Testor)

This helps prevent a common problem:

The primary database claims to have no logs, but the backups or third-party infrastructure actually retain them.

17. Does No Logs Mean SingLinkVPN Knows Nothing at All?

No.

This point must be explained clearly.

To provide a functioning service, SingLinkVPN still needs to process limited account and service data.

For example:

Cumulative uploaded/downloaded traffic

is used for plan and traffic calculations.

Daily total traffic

is used for daily allowances.

Online device status

is used to enforce device-count limits.

Order numbers

are used for subscriptions and after-sales service.

Customer support and SingChat

are support data initiated by the user.

Remote diagnostics

are generated only when a user actively requests technical support. (VPN Testor)

But this data does not include:

Which website was visited, which DNS request was made, or what content was viewed.

For example, the daily traffic system can know only:

How many GB were used today.

It does not know:

Whether those GB went to YouTube, Google, or another website.

This is the difference between:

Service data

and:

User activity logs

as separate categories.

18. Why Was a Complete No-Logs Audit Not Repeated After the Desktop 2.5 Update?

Because the two audits examine different things.

Desktop 2.5 Security Audit

It is closely related to a specific client version.

After a client update, the following still need to be checked:

• VPN connection;

• DNS;

• IP;

• Routing;

• WebRTC;

• Local logs;

• Installer;

• API;

• New protocol.

That is why new security verification continues to be added for 2.5.x releases.

No-Logs Verification

It primarily covers:

• Backend data structures;

• VPN node logs;

• Data reporting;

• Databases;

• Cloud/CDN;

• Data retention;

• Administrator queries;

• Backup mechanisms.

It answers:

Has SingLinkVPN created records of users’ network activity?

If a desktop client update does not change:

What data is collected, what data is reported, and what data the server stores,

then there is no need to mechanically duplicate an identical no-logs report simply because a 2.5.x version number changed.

But if the future brings:

• New telemetry;

• Changes to log reporting;

• Changes to backend fields;

• Changes to VPN node logging;

• A new third-party analytics system;

• Changes to data retention;

then the no-logs verification should be repeated.

19. So, Is SingLinkVPN Safe?

If you want only a direct answer:

According to the currently published independent security audit, within the versions, network environments, and test scope listed in the report, no unresolved critical-, high-, medium-, or low-risk vulnerabilities were found in the SingLinkVPN desktop 2.5 series, and the latest complete security rating is 100/100.

This conclusion is not based only on a score.

The independent party has verified:

Security during abnormal VPN disconnections and network switching

DNS leak protection

IPv4 / IPv6 leak protection

WebRTC privacy

Routing security

Account and token security

API access control

Local browsing records

Installers and software updates

and:

Regression testing after the known issue was fixed. (VPN Testor)

At the privacy level, the independent production-environment no-logs verification as of July 29, 2026 found no evidence that SingLinkVPN persistently recorded:

Websites

Domains

URLs

DNS queries

Original IP history

Node usage history

Per-connection history

Browsing content

or:

Communication content. (VPN Testor)

SingLinkVPN’s current security verification can therefore be summarized simply in two layers:

Layer one: The client does not leak

DNS / IP / IPv6 / WebRTC / routing / accounts / API

↓

Independent security audit: 100/100

Layer two: The server does not record users’ network activity

Websites / URLs / DNS / original IP addresses / node history / browsing content

↓

Independent production-environment no-logs verification: Passed

Compared with simply saying:

“We are safe,”

this is more meaningful.

Because users can see:

What was specifically tested, what passed, and which data the system does not persist at all.

Frequently Asked Questions

Has SingLinkVPN Desktop 2.5 Passed a Security Audit?

Yes. The latest security records include verification related to macOS 2.5.7 and Windows 2.5.8, and the latest complete 2026 v2.0 report is rated 100/100. (VPN Testor)

Does SingLinkVPN Leak DNS?

The independent audit found no consistently reproducible DNS leaks. (VPN Testor)

Can the Real IP Address Leak?

The independent party found no consistently reproducible IPv4 or IPv6 leaks. (VPN Testor)

Is WebRTC Safe?

WebRTC was part of the formal security test scope, and no consistently reproducible WebRTC leaks were found. (VPN Testor)

Does SingLinkVPN Record the Websites I Visit?

As of the no-logs audit’s reference date, the independent party found no evidence that the central backend, nodes, cloud/CDN, or backups persistently stored users’ websites, destination domains, full URLs, or browsing content. (VPN Testor)

Does SingLinkVPN Record My Real IP Address?

The independent party found no evidence that the central backend or VPN nodes persistently stored users’ original IP history. (VPN Testor)

SingLinkVPN Has Traffic Records, So How Can It Still Be Called No Logs?

The system stores limited service data required to provide plan features, such as cumulative uploaded and downloaded traffic. This data does not contain traffic destinations, websites, URLs, or browsing content. (VPN Testor)

Does 100/100 Mean Vulnerabilities Can Never Appear?

No. It means that the versions, environments, and audit scope listed in the current report met the 100-point standard. Testing must continue after major software-version changes. (VPN Testor)

Conclusion

The security of SingLinkVPN desktop 2.5 should not be explained only with:

“It passed a security audit”

as a short phrase.

What truly matters is the specific result provided by the independent verification:

No consistently reproducible DNS, IPv4, IPv6, or WebRTC leaks were found; the VPN underwent security testing in abnormal-disconnection and network-switching scenarios; accounts, tokens, and internal APIs underwent access-control testing; no browsing-content or DNS-query records were found locally in the client; installers and the update chain were included in the review; and the previously identified issue was fixed and passed independent retesting. (VPN Testor)

At the same time, the independent production-environment no-logs verification further confirmed that, as of the audit’s reference date, no evidence was found that SingLinkVPN persistently stored users’ visited websites, domains, URLs, DNS queries, original IP history, node history, or browsing content. (VPN Testor)

For an ordinary user, the two reports therefore answer the two most practical questions separately:

After I connect to SingLinkVPN, could my real network information leak because of a client problem?

And:

Even if the connection is secure, will the server save my browsing activity?

The currently published independent verification results answer both questions with:

Passed.