Choosing uncensored AI for security: Drael and Venice fail

To choose an uncensored AI for security work, check eight things before the model: who the seller is, what the licence allows, which weights you get, where tools execute, what is kept, who administers the account, what it costs at your volume, and whether the vendor's own pages hold together. Drael and Venice both fail checks that rule them out for client work.

Data collected on 9 and 10 November 2026 from Drael's site, terms and documentation, from Venice's Terms of Service, privacy page and API pricing, and from NotHoly pricing. We publish no benchmark of our own, so none of this ranks answer quality.

#Why the provider is part of the engagement risk

The Verizon 2026 DBIR found a third party involved in 48% of breaches. Netskope reports that source code is 42% of the data sent to GenAI apps in policy violations. An AI provider receives your client's code and findings, so it gets the same review as any other supplier. The OWASP LLM Top 10 files "Unclear T&Cs and data privacy policies of the model operators" under LLM03.

#Eight checks and how to run each

#1. A seller with a name

Open the terms and look for a legal entity, a governing law and a venue. Without them you have no counterparty. Drael's terms say only "the operator". Venice's terms give an address in Sheridan, Wyoming, and require arbitration with a class action waiver. NotHoly's terms name the holder by CNPJ, with governing law and venue.

#2. A licence that covers paid work

Search the terms for "commercial". Venice's section 7.1 grants a licence "solely for your personal, non-commercial use". If you bill a client for the work, have counsel read that sentence before you rely on the tool.

#3. Weights you can name

Ask which base model answers and whether it can change without notice. Drael serves one alias, drael-v1, "over weights that are ours to change", and does not disclose the base. Venice lists sources per model. NotHoly publishes each base on the models page.

#4. Where tools execute

Find out whose IP reaches a target. Drael runs code, fetches pages and queries breach databases from its own server. NIST SP 800-115 puts authorized source addresses in the rules of engagement, and a vendor's server is not on that list. On NotHoly the CLI runs commands on your machine after you approve them.

#5. What is kept and who can see it

Read the privacy page for each surface. Venice's terms reserve the right to "monitor any and all information transmitted or received" (10.11), and its privacy documentation says of third-party models that "you should assume the provider is storing your content". Drael keeps "the code you ran" and files for "up to three days after it was last used". On NotHoly, API content is not recorded, only metadata, and chat history is saved unless you choose an ephemeral chat.

#6. An account a team can administer

Look for organizations, roles and an audit log, and for a DPA under GDPR article 28 or the LGPD. Drael's public documentation has accounts and keys and nothing above them. NotHoly has organizations, roles, workspaces and an audit log, and no published DPA.

#7. Cost at your real volume

Price a real week of work, including the cost of entry. Drael's API starts at US$ 70 per four weeks. Venice's US$ 18 plan includes US$ 1 of API credit a month. NotHoly starts at a US$ 5 top-up with credits that do not expire.

#8. Pages that agree with each other

Compare the landing page with the documentation. A vendor whose own pages disagree has not reviewed them, and you should wonder what else went unreviewed. Drael's home page shows zero answers refused, and its error reference lists a refusal code for the image model. Its terms point to a "plan page" that returns 404.

#How Drael, Venice and NotHoly score

Check	Drael	Venice	NotHoly
Named seller	No	Yes, arbitration required	Yes, CNPJ, law and venue
Licence for client work	Not addressed	"personal, non-commercial use" (7.1)	Sold to teams and solo developers
Named weights	No, one alias	Yes, per model	Yes, per model
Tools run on your machine	No, on Drael's server	Not reviewed	Yes, through the CLI
Content retention stated	Code and files kept	Monitoring reserved (10.11)	API content not recorded
Team controls	Not in public docs	Not reviewed	Organizations, roles, audit log
Lowest API entry	US$ 70 per four weeks	Pay as you go	US$ 5
Pages consistent	No	Terms (10.11) and privacy page pull apart	You can check ours

Venice is the more serious company of the two: it has a name, published per-model prices and encrypted modes on some models. It is still a consumer product whose licence says personal use, and its best-known uncensored model is a fine-tune with 128K of context. Drael fails five of the eight checks outright.

#How to weigh the checks for your kind of work

For a client engagement, checks 1, 2 and 4 are pass or fail. A missing counterparty, a personal-use licence or traffic from a vendor's server each ends the evaluation. For solo research on your own lab, checks 3 and 7 matter most. In both cases test the model yourself: take ten prompts from your real work, send them to each candidate and count refusals and errors.

#Where each fits

Drael fits a solo user who wants a no-questions chatbot and will never name the tool in a contract. Venice fits personal, non-commercial use of a large catalogue with media generation. NotHoly fits paid security work for teams and solo developers: a named seller, commercial use, abliterated models with published bases, and team controls. All three meter or price their API; only the first two come with a reason a client's counsel can reject.

#Frequently asked questions

#What is the best uncensored AI for pentesting?

The one that passes checks 1, 2 and 4, because those decide whether you can use it on a client at all. NotHoly was built around them; see pentesting.

#Are abliterated models better than uncensored ones?

They are made differently. Abliteration removes the refusal direction and leaves the other weights alone, and a fine-tune retrains the model. We prefer abliteration for technical work, and abliterated vs uncensored models gives the reasons.

#Can I put client data in an uncensored LLM?

Only when the contract with the client and the provider's terms both allow it. Read the retention and licence clauses first.

#How do I test an uncensored model before paying much?

Use a provider with no minimum. On NotHoly, US$ 5 covers a test set on any model in the catalogue.

#Verdict

Run the eight checks in order and stop at the first failure. Drael stops at the first: there is no seller to name. Venice stops at the second: the licence says personal, non-commercial use. NotHoly passes those and admits what it lacks, which is a published DPA, SOC 2 and ISO 27001. The detailed comparisons are Drael vs NotHoly, Venice AI vs NotHoly and Venice AI for professional security work. NotHoly pricing starts at US$ 5.