Authoritarian Government Proscriptions

People tell Max far more than they expect to. A question that starts with a dog rarely stays there, because a dog sits in the middle of someone's whole life. An owner asking for help might be sleeping rough and unable to feed their dog, fleeing an abusive home and looking for somewhere the dog can go too, or frightened that their government is closing in and unsure what will happen to the animals they love. In moments like these, Max is not really being asked about dogs. He is being told something deeply personal, by someone with nowhere else to turn, and that trust is the whole reason this policy exists. Because conversations like these reveal exactly what a hostile government most wants to know: where someone is, what they fear, who they are, and what they are running from.

We believe anyone should be able to seek help from Max, and share as much as they're comfortable with, without fear that their conversations will ever be disclosed to authorities who may use that information to persecute, prosecute, intimidate, or otherwise harm them. Authoritarian Government Proscriptions (AGP) exists because we believe privacy has little meaning if only applied in some places where it's already protected. Around the world, many government have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to use and access personal communications, digital services, and private information to identify, intimidate, prosecute, or otherwise harm people exercising rights we think should be protected (such as the right to disagree with governments, protest rights, human rights, religious rights, LGBTQ rights, whistleblowing, and ordinary citizens expressing what we consider not to be harmful content).

We believe AI companies have a responsibility not to become an extension of that surveillance. So when someone chooses to ask Max for help, they shouldn't have to wonder whether an unrelated government could later obtain those chats and use them against them. Where we have legal discretion, privacy and the dignity of those who trust us comes first, and we will never assist governments that have no lawful authority over dogAdvisor or whose requests would expose people to unnecessary and disproportionate risk. If asked to share information about users on the basis of convenience, diplomacy, or political pressure by governments we have proscribed under AGP, we will reject them without consideration of circumstances. AGP does not shield criminal activity or obstruct law enforcement in the UK, so when asked by UK authorities and UK law to disclose information under the laws governing dogAdvisor we'll comply when left with no other choice - and we'll notify you (if we can) if this has happened. AGP applies where we retain discretion over disclosure, and exists to prevent cooperation with governments who are incompatible with our views on a free, fair, and democratic society and incompatible with the fundamental civil liberties we believe everyone is entitled to.

Authoritarian Government Proscriptions are based on conduct of governments, and not the people or nations they govern. Designations are made against lack of: judicial independence, protection of civil liberties, freedom of expression and speech, due process, state surveillance practices, political pluralism. Proscriptions are informed by findings from international human rights organisations, and governments can be classified, de-classified, or re-classified as conditions change.

The following governments have been proscribed by dogAdvisor as authoritarian:

Laos

Libya

Mali

Myanmar

Nicaragua

Niger

North Korea

Oman

Pakistan

Qatar

Republic of the Congo

Russia

Rwanda

Saudi Arabia

Sudan

Syria

Tajikistan

Thailand

Turkey

Turkmenistan

Uganda

UAE

Venezuela

Vietnam

Yemen

Zimbabwe

Afghanistan

Algeria

Azerbaijan

Bahrain

Belarus

Brunei

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Central African Republic

Chad

China

Comoros

Cuba

Djibouti

Egypt

Equatorial Guinea

Eritrea

Eswatini

Ethiopia

Guinea

Guinea-Bissau

Haiti

Iran

Iraq

Kazakhstan

Last update → 26 June 2026

"AI companies have a responsibility not to extend surveillance powers of oppressive states. We believe your right to privacy when interacting with AI models is a fundamental human right, and that this right is only meaningful if it exists even where governments might want to violate it"

Deni Darenberg, Founder dogAdvisor