Transparency alternatives to Kofile
Other Court case management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Kofile. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 19 that differ from Kofile on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Kofile has 11 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Kofile” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Kofile | Found at Kofile, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| One Legalonelegal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to One Legal | 30/100 | 3 Status page with history, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| Daily Journaldailyjournal.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Daily Journal | 17/100 | 2 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Verbit Courtsverbit.aiSee also Transparency alternatives to Verbit Courts | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | nothing | Compare |
| TrusteSolutionstrustesolutions.comSee also Transparency alternatives to TrusteSolutions | 13/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| VIQ Solutionsviqsolutions.comSee also Transparency alternatives to VIQ Solutions | 13/100 | 2 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| equivantequivant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to equivant | 17/100 | 1 Data location stated | nothing | Compare |
| US Legal Supportuslegalsupport.comSee also Transparency alternatives to US Legal Support | 13/100 | 1 Data location stated | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Conduent Courtsconduent.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Conduent Courts | 9/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| CourtCallcourtcall.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CourtCall | 9/100 | 1 Public pricing | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Jano Technologiesjanotech.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jano Technologies | 9/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Journal Technologiesjournaltech.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Journal Technologies | 9/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Netsentialnetsential.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Netsential | 9/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 1 Named privacy contact | 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.