Should you build your own Incogni?

Build a closest honest personal substitute for Incogni in an empty repository.
Use Rust, Tauri 2, React, SQLite, Argon2id, and audited cryptographic libraries; do not offer alternative stacks.
The core loop is: track manual data-removal requests and reminders locally with strong encryption, never impersonating the user or bypassing identity checks, and without claiming to replace an audited service.
Make the first run work locally with one documented command.
Store all user data locally by default and make export straightforward.
Put secrets in .env, ship .env.example, and never commit credentials.
Write a plain-language threat model before implementing any sensitive feature.
Keep all vault data encrypted with a master key derived through Argon2id and a unique salt.
Use authenticated encryption from a maintained library and never invent cryptographic primitives.
Implement lock timeout, clipboard clearing, password generation, import, export, and encrypted backups.
Make recovery-key creation explicit and test restore from a fresh installation.
Display a persistent warning that the build has not received an independent security audit.
Include clear empty, loading, success, and recoverable error states.
Add input validation, safe filenames, and graceful handling of unavailable APIs.
Write focused tests for the core transformation and one end-to-end happy path.
Create a README with setup, architecture, permissions, data location, and backup steps.
Do not add accounts, billing, telemetry, analytics, or a hosted control plane.
Do not claim to reproduce proprietary data, network liquidity, regulated access, or frontier infrastructure.
Deliberately leave out a production VPN or anonymity network.
Deliberately leave out identity-protection monitoring and data-broker removal.
Deliberately leave out enterprise security guarantees, audits, and emergency support.
Finish by running the tests and listing the exact commands used.