Riluno child safety standards
These are the child safety standards for Riluno, the app published on Google Play and the App Store by Hossein Bagherzadegan Talkhouncheh, who operates Riluno as a natural person trading in their own name. Riluno is a small service run by one person; that is not an excuse for anything on this page, but it is why the limits at the end are stated rather than implied.
In effect from 29 August 2026. This page is kept in step with what the service actually does. If a control described here is removed, this page changes with it.
Our commitment
Riluno prohibits child sexual abuse and exploitation absolutely. There is no context in which such material or conduct is permitted here, no appeal that restores it, and no threshold of severity below which it is tolerated. This prohibition binds every account, including our own.
What we mean by CSAE and CSAM
CSAE means child sexual abuse and exploitation: any sexualisation of a person under 18, grooming, sextortion, trafficking, solicitation, or the promotion or normalisation of any of these.
CSAM means child sexual abuse material: any image, video, or other depiction of a person under 18 in a sexual context.
Nobody under 16 may create an account
Creating an account requires asserting a date of birth showing an age of at least 16. Article 8 GDPR sets the age at which a person can consent to an online service alone; member states may lower it to 13, and Germany has not.
The date of birth is read to answer that one question and then discarded. No account record carries it and nothing logs it. It is an asserted age, not a verified one: Riluno performs no document check and no face estimation, because both collect far more than the answer is worth. The intent is not to build parental consent but to not process children's data at all.
Nothing publishes without a person approving it
A video is not published when it is uploaded. It is screened automatically, and then a named human reviewer must approve it. That approval is bound to a checksum of the exact bytes reviewed, so approving one video and substituting another does not publish anything. People who upload cannot approve their own work: publication is a separate permission that uploaders do not hold.
The automated screening is fail-closed. A scan that is missing, incomplete, unreadable, out of date, or that covers too little of the video does not pass the item through — it holds it for a human. Absence of evidence is never treated as evidence of safety. If no scanner is configured at all, publication is impossible rather than permissive.
Material the scanner assesses as CSAE goes to a quarantine that no transition leads out of. It cannot be appealed, cannot return to publication by any route, and is not shown in the ordinary moderation queue, so it is not circulated further by the act of reviewing it.
Anyone can report, without an account
Reporting is open to any person who can see the content, signed in or not, in the app and on the website. That follows Article 16 of the EU Digital Services Act, which makes notice a right rather than a member benefit. “Child sexual abuse or exploitation” is the first category offered in the app's report screen.
A report opens a case against the item and puts it in front of a human. Reports never remove anything on their own: no volume of reports changes what is visible, because that would make removal a voting mechanism.
What happens when we learn of CSAM
On obtaining actual knowledge of CSAM, Riluno removes it. A moderator can withhold or remove any video and can moderate any comment. Removal does not wait on an appeal, and there is no appeal that returns material the scanner assessed as CSAE: that quarantine is final by construction.
The account is suspended. Suspension stops it signing in, ends every session it holds, and withdraws everything it has published — so enforcement is not limited to the item that was found.
Reporting to authorities
Riluno is established in Germany. On confirming that material is CSAM, Riluno reports it to the competent authorities. In Germany that is the Bundeskriminalamt; where the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) accepts a report from a provider outside the United States, Riluno reports there as well. Riluno responds to lawful requests from law enforcement and preserves what it holds at the time such a request is received.
This reporting is carried out by a person, not by an automated pipeline. Riluno operates no direct NCMEC CyberTipline integration and makes no claim to one. Article 18 of the EU Digital Services Act requires a provider that becomes aware of information giving rise to a suspicion of a criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of a person to inform the competent authorities, and Riluno treats CSAE as falling within it.
Child safety point of contact
Child safety matters, including notifications from Google Play, questions from regulators, and law enforcement requests, reach us at abuse@riluno.org. Urgent reports of material depicting a child should also go to local law enforcement, who can act faster than any platform.
What Riluno does not do
Stating the limits plainly is part of the standard. A page that overclaims is worse than one that is small and true.
- No hash matching. Riluno does not run PhotoDNA or any CSAM hash corpus, and contributes no hashes to one. Detection rests on screening every upload, human approval before publication, and reports.
- No age verification. The age floor is an assertion at the door, not a proof.
- Evidence preservation is narrow. Material the scanner quarantined is withheld from deletion: an account deletion request no longer removes it, and the request completes while that material is retained. Riluno has no broader legal-hold mechanism, so preservation outside quarantine cannot be guaranteed.
- Reported CSAE is not yet a separate pipeline. A report naming child safety opens a case and reaches a human like any other report; it does not currently trigger the distinct handling that scanner-detected CSAE receives.
These are limits of the current implementation, not of the policy. The prohibition is absolute regardless of what detects a violation. Each of these is known, tracked, and intended to close; none of them narrows what is forbidden above.
Related: the terms, the privacy notice, and your data rights.