Best end-to-end encrypted AI: seven apps ranked by who can read your prompt

The Morse teamPublished November 7, 2026Facts checked November 7, 20269 min read

The best end-to-end encrypted AI, ranked by who can read your prompt, is Morse, followed by Confer, Maple, Venice, and Brave Leo, with Duck.ai and Proton's Lumo behind them because neither says your prompt is encrypted on your device for an attested enclave. Morse comes first on the combination: your browser verifies the enclave itself, your history stays on your device, and its encrypted mode runs open-weight models like GLM, Kimi, and DeepSeek, for $19 a month on Pro.

We read every company's own pricing, privacy, security, and developer pages on November 7, 2026, plus Venice's public model list and Brave's browser source code, and scored each app's encrypted mode on five tests. Brave's first end-to-end encrypted model arrived on October 15, 2026, Maple's model catalog was last reviewed on November 5, and Venice's encrypted model list has grown to 13. Confer, Maple, and Brave publish their security designs in detail, and we quote them where they're candid about their own limits.

Which AI chatbots are really end-to-end encrypted?

Five of the seven: Morse on Pro, Confer, Maple, Venice on Pro, and Brave Leo for one model. In each, your device encrypts the prompt so that only attested hardware can open it. Duck.ai runs two models in an enclave but doesn't call its chats end-to-end encrypted, and Proton calls Lumo's design by another name.

Some of the lists that rank for encrypted AI chatbots are out of date. Venice's own "AI chatbots with encryption" roundup, dated July 30, 2026, ranks eight tools and leaves out Confer and Maple, both of which encrypt every chat on their free plans (Venice). It also says Brave Leo's "Encryption story is retention + TLS/proxy, not Pro E2EE." Brave's announcement came 11 weeks later. Since October 15, 2026, Brave Leo's GLM 5.3 Flash chats have been end-to-end encrypted to an enclave in Brave's Release channel (Brave).

The scores

As of November 7, 2026. Each test is worth 0 to 2 points, for a total out of 10.

The five tests

We scored the most protective mode each app offers, because that's the one you'd pick for a chat no one should read, and we scored only what each company's own pages and code say.

1. Where your prompt is opened. 2: the company says your device encrypts the prompt for an enclave and only enclaves decrypt it. 1: no encryption from your device to an enclave is described, and the prompt is opened on servers the company controls or passed by the company to an enclave. 0: a third-party provider opens it under a contract.
2. Who checks the enclave. 2: the app's own pages say your browser or device verifies the attestation of the enclave that runs the model, and of any enclave the prompt passes through on the way, before anything is sent. 1: an attestation check is described, but it's run by the company's servers or enclaves, or documented only for its developer API and not for the app on your device. 0: no attestation check is described.
3. Where history lives. 2: only on your device. 1: on the company's servers, encrypted with keys it says it can't use. 0: on its servers, readable by it.
4. Models in the encrypted mode. 2: the company names three or more models that run in it. 1: it names one or two, or names none. 0: there's no mode encrypted to the model.
5. Price of the encrypted mode. 2: the free plan includes it, without conditions. 1: it's sure to come with a paid plan of $20 a month or less. 0: it costs more than $20 a month, or there's no such mode.

Ties are broken by who checks the enclave, then by models, then by price. We show open-source code in each pick's section but don't score it, because a public repository can't tell you what a server is running at the moment you send. Maple's proof page says as much: "A fingerprint match means Maple approved that software, not that it was built from the public source" (Maple). The attestation check is what ties a running server to the build the company approved, so that's what we scored.

What each score rests on

Why Morse ranks first

Among the seven, only Morse scores 2 on all three tests of who can reach your prompt. In an E2EE chat, your browser checks the enclave's hardware attestation against versions pinned in the app before anything is sent, seals the message for that enclave alone, and opens the reply itself, while our servers pass along ciphertext they can't read. Open-weight models like GLM, Kimi, and DeepSeek answer inside enclaves run by third-party providers, not by Morse, and the guarantee rests on the enclave hardware and attestation working as designed. The chat's history stays encrypted in your browser instead of on our servers, so clearing the browser erases it and we can't bring it back. E2EE chats come with Pro, at $19 a month, and our guide to end-to-end encrypted AI chat walks through each check your browser makes and the two other modes.

How the other six compare

Confer

Confer's client checks the confidential VM's attestation against a public, append-only release log before sending (Confer), and the product text served in confer.to's site code puts that protection in the free Guest plan, at 20 messages a day (Confer). It loses a point for history stored encrypted on Confer's servers and another for models it doesn't name; Maple vs Confer covers its passkey-derived keys.

Maple

Maple lists "End-to-end encryption" on its $0 plan (Maple) and 10 models in a catalog last reviewed November 5, 2026 (Maple). It scores 1 on checking because, in Maple's words, "You do not attest the model's enclave directly" (Maple), and 1 on history because chats sync between devices, a trade-off Maple vs Confer weighs.

Venice

Venice has the most E2EE models here, 13 on its public model list (Venice), keeps history on your device, and charges $18 a month for the Pro plan E2EE needs (Venice; Venice). It scores 1 on checking because its developer docs describe a client-side attestation check for the API, but its privacy page doesn't say the web app runs one in your browser; Venice vs Maple explains how its encryption works.

Brave Leo

Since October 15, 2026, one Leo model, GLM 5.3 Flash, has been end-to-end encrypted to an enclave in beta (Brave), and Brave's browser code opens it to Premium users, and to free users only when Brave's freemium setting is on (Brave). Brave says that for now "your browser relies on the gateway for this check," so it scores 1 on checking, and 1 on price because only Premium, at $14.99 a month, is sure to include it; Duck.ai vs Lumo vs Brave Leo covers the rest of Leo.

Duck.ai

Duck.ai runs gpt-oss-120b and Gemma 4 31B free in a Trusted Execution Environment it labels "zero provider visibility" (DuckDuckGo). DuckDuckGo says it ensures the host can't read your prompts "via technical means," but describes no encryption from your device to the enclave and no attestation check, so it scores 1 on where the prompt is opened and 0 on checking; the same three-way comparison has more.

Proton Lumo

Proton says Lumo must "provide the LLM with cleartext messages" and calls the design "user-to-Lumo (U2L) encryption" instead of end-to-end, with no enclave described (Proton). Lumo's points come from history synced with zero-access encryption (Proton), and our Proton Lumo review covers the rest.

Confer vs Maple vs Venice: which is most private?

Confer, narrowly, because your client checks the enclave that runs the model against a public log, while Maple's enclave does that step for you and Venice doesn't say its web app does it in your browser. Venice keeps history on your device where Confer and Maple sync it encrypted, and Maple vs Confer and Venice vs Maple set the three side by side in depth.

Which encrypted AI should you pick?

• Choose Confer or Maple if you want encrypted chats without paying, and history that follows you to a new device.
• Choose Venice if model choice inside the encrypted mode matters most to you.
• Choose Brave Leo if you'd rather stay in the browser you already use and one encrypted model is enough.
• Choose Duck.ai if you want to try an enclave model with no account and can accept DuckDuckGo's word that its host can't read your prompts.
• Choose Lumo if you're a Proton user and a no-logs policy on Proton's own servers covers what you ask.
• Choose Morse if you want the enclave checked by your own browser, a chat history that stays on your device, and, in the same account, GPT, Claude, and Gemini sent without your account, email, or IP address.

Start free today, then move to Pro to open your first E2EE chat and see every check your browser ran.

What we read, and when

Every page linked above was read on November 7, 2026, and each app's strongest mode was scored on the five tests exactly as written here. Venice's E2EE model count comes from its public model list and Brave's plan access from its browser code on GitHub. We took each company at its written word and ran no lab tests. Facts about Morse come from our privacy policy and our own product.

Morse publishes this comparison. We've tried to keep it fair; if something's wrong or out of date, email hello@trymorse.ai.

Confer, Maple, Venice, Brave, Leo, DuckDuckGo, Duck.ai, Proton, and Lumo are trademarks of their owners. Morse is not affiliated with or endorsed by any of them.