docs: Update outdated disclaimer about lack of encryption

[getify]

per @jsimnz

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.04%. Comparing base (e540bb6) to head (7acdabf).
Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3647      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    78.07%   78.04%   -0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          408      408              
  Lines        37344    37344              
===========================================
- Hits         29154    29145       -9     
- Misses        6405     6411       +6     
- Partials      1785     1788       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
all-tests	78.04% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 12 files with indirect coverage changes

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e540bb6...7acdabf. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[jsimnz]

todo: I think for the disclaimer, we can leave the rest about production ready status. For the "do not use it for production purposes", we can lighten up this language a bit since we do currently have some partners using in prod.

Instead we can say something like: "we encourage teams looking to deploy to production to reach out to us". Or something to that affect.

[jsimnz]

LGTM

[shahzadlone]

Perhaps docs(i): .. in title.

LGTM

[jsimnz]

Perhaps docs(i): .. in title.

I don't think the i is necessary. Its fine to have this in the changelog