Transparency alternatives to Second Front Game Warden
Other Cloud hosting vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Second Front Game Warden does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 34 that differ from Second Front Game Warden on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Second Front Game Warden has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “publishes and Second Front Game Warden does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Second Front Game Warden does not | Second Front Game Warden publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exoscaleexoscale.com | 87/100 | 8 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +5 | nothing | Compare |
| Kinstakinsta.com | 70/100 | 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +4 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Renderrender.com | 74/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| DigitalOceandigitalocean.com | 65/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Vercelvercel.com | 65/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Railwayrailway.com | 52/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Aptibleaptible.com | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Cloudflarecloudflare.com | 48/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Fly.iofly.io | 48/100 | 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Scalewayscaleway.com | 43/100 | 4 Status page with history, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, +1 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| WP Enginewpengine.com | 35/100 | 4 Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Netlifynetlify.com | 43/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, Notice before subprocessors change | nothing | Compare |
Only criteria we could measure for both are counted. Where we could measure one and not the other, the row is silent: that would be a statement about our measurement, not about either vendor. Every single result with its source is on the two profiles.