SaaS Ranking
Menu

GitLab: what they publish

gitlab.com · Developer collaboration and CI · checked 2026-10-13

17/100FBand F

Rank 37 of 55 in Developer collaboration and CI, where the median is 22.

Public transparency score, not a product or security rating. Latest check: 2026-10-13. How the score works.

Evidence at a glance

Choose a check to see its source, date and scope.

Not found means not found at the addresses we checked. Not measured means we could not complete the check.

Start a vendor reviewDownload evidence (CSV)

Overview

6 days since the newest dated result, 6 since the oldest. 12 of 12 criteria have a measured result in the last 30 days. Failed checks and undated results are excluded.

Evidence freshness is a statement about our measurement and is kept apart from the transparency score, which is frozen at v1. How good our own measurement is.

Transparency labelsaas-ranking.com

GitLab

gitlab.com · Developer collaboration and CI

  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
F 17of 100 Rank 37 of 55

Published commitments1 of 9 found

Measured behaviour2 of 3 found

Checked 2026-10-13. Every line links the page we found it on. A cross means we found nothing at the addresses we checked, not that the vendor has no such document. A transparency score, not a product rating.

Downloads include all checks, source URLs, dates and the snapshot ID for your procurement file. We do not issue badges.

The label is the whole measurement in one object: every criterion with its weight, the band, and the date. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Every line in it links the page we found the result on, or lists the addresses we checked. A cross means we found nothing there, not that GitLab has no such document.

Where GitLab sits in Developer collaboration and CI

  1. A0 0%
  2. B3 5%
  3. C4 7%
  4. D3 5%
  5. E15 27%
  6. F30 55%
55 vendors with a score; 4 more without a score because we could measure too little. Bands have fixed thresholds, see how the score works.

The band of GitLab is marked. Vendors without a score are the ones where we could measure too few criteria to rank them – a gap on our side, counted separately.

What GitLab states

The exact figures and names we read off the pages linked below, with the sentence they stand in. This is what they publish, not what we verified about their systems.

Gaps, heaviest first

✗

Data processing agreement (DPA)

weight 3 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 8 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/legal/dpa – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/dpa – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  3. https://gitlab.com/legal/data-processing-agreement – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/data-processing-agreement – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/legal/data-processing-addendum – found, but behind a sign-in
  6. https://gitlab.com/legal/gdpr – found, but behind a sign-in
  7. https://gitlab.com/trust/dpa – found, but behind a sign-in
  8. https://gitlab.com/privacy/dpa – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Data processing agreement in Developer collaboration and CI: 6 of 55 companies

✗

Subprocessors: the published list

weight 3 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 7 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/legal/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  3. https://gitlab.com/sub-processors – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/legal/sub-processors – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/trust/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  6. https://gitlab.com/privacy/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  7. https://gitlab.com/legal/subprocessor-list – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Subprocessor list in Developer collaboration and CI: 8 of 55 companies

✗

Data location: where they say data is hosted

weight 3 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 7 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/security – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  2. https://gitlab.com/trust – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  3. https://gitlab.com/legal/privacy – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/privacy – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  5. https://gitlab.com/privacy-policy – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  6. https://gitlab.com/compliance – found, but behind a sign-in
  7. https://gitlab.com/legal/privacy-policy – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Data location stated in Developer collaboration and CI: 19 of 56 companies

✗

Status page with incident history

weight 2 of 3

No public status page found.

Checked 3 addresses on 2026-10-13.

Show the 3 addresses we checked
  1. https://status.gitlab.com/ – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  2. https://gitlab.com/status – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  3. https://gitlab.com.statuspage.io/ – Could not be fetched: fetch failed.

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Status page with history in Developer collaboration and CI: 12 of 57 companies

✗

Public pricing with figures

weight 2 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 5 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/pricing – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/pricing/ – found, but behind a sign-in
  3. https://gitlab.com/plans – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/en/pricing – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/pricing-plans – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Public pricing in Developer collaboration and CI: 40 of 57 companies

✗weight 2 of 3

Third-party requests seen on the first load, before any interaction.

Checked 1 address on 2026-10-13.

Show the 1 address we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/ – third-party requests before any interaction: cdn.cookielaw.org, geolocation.onetrust.com, pagead2.googlesyndication.com, res.cloudinary.com, www.googletagmanager.com

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: No third-party tracking before consent in Developer collaboration and CI: 2 of 59 companies

✗

Notice before subprocessors change

weight 2 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 8 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/legal/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  3. https://gitlab.com/sub-processors – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/legal/dpa – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/dpa – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  6. https://gitlab.com/legal/data-processing-agreement – found, but behind a sign-in
  7. https://gitlab.com/trust/subprocessors – found, but behind a sign-in
  8. https://gitlab.com/legal/sub-processors – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Notice before subprocessors change in Developer collaboration and CI: 8 of 56 companies

✗

Uptime SLA with a figure

weight 1 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 6 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/legal/sla – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/sla – found, but behind a sign-in
  3. https://gitlab.com/legal/service-level-agreement – found, but behind a sign-in
  4. https://gitlab.com/trust/sla – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/uptime – found, but behind a sign-in
  6. https://gitlab.com/legal/uptime-sla – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Uptime SLA with a figure in Developer collaboration and CI: 4 of 56 companies

✗

Named privacy contact (DPO or privacy address)

weight 1 of 3

We found this behind a sign-in, so it is not published openly.

Seen at https://gitlab.com/users/sign_in · checked 2026-10-13

Show the 7 addresses we checked
  1. https://gitlab.com/legal/privacy – found, but behind a sign-in
  2. https://gitlab.com/privacy – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  3. https://gitlab.com/privacy-policy – reached, no match (HTTP 200)
  4. https://gitlab.com/legal/privacy-policy – found, but behind a sign-in
  5. https://gitlab.com/legal/privacy-notice – found, but behind a sign-in
  6. https://gitlab.com/trust/privacy – found, but behind a sign-in
  7. https://gitlab.com/datenschutz – found, but behind a sign-in

Is this wrong? Send us the URL

Across the market: Named privacy contact in Developer collaboration and CI: 11 of 56 companies

Evidence

The full source lists sit behind these two groups, so that the answer above stays readable.

Published, with a source 3
✓

HTTPS enforced with HSTS

weight 2 of 3

HTTP redirects to HTTPS and the HSTS header is set.

  • HSTS max-age 31536000 seconds (365 days).
    Show the exact wording

    max-age=31536000

    Read at https://gitlab.com/

Source: https://gitlab.com/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: HTTPS enforced with HSTS in Developer collaboration and CI: 45 of 59 companies

✓

Certifications named (SOC 2, ISO 27001)

weight 1 of 3

SOC 2 or ISO 27001 named on a public page.

  • Named on that page CSA STAR (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), ISO/IEC 27001 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), ISO/IEC 27017 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), ISO/IEC 27018 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), PCI DSS (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), SOC 2 (not counted: the sentence does not carry it), TISAX (not counted: the sentence does not carry it). The sentence we kept does not carry this finding on its own, so it counts in no list and no figure.
    Show the 7 exact wordings

    Compliance CCPA CSA STAR CSA Trusted Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Compliance CCPA CSA STAR CSA Trusted Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Pub

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Compliance CCPA CSA STAR CSA Trusted Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Public Private Ge

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Compliance CCPA CSA STAR CSA Trusted Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Public Private Get access Bulk do...

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Trusted Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Public Private Get access Bulk download Featured Documents REP...

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Cloud Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Public Private Get access Bulk download Featured Documents REPORTS Pen...

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

    Provider GDPR ISO/IEC 27001 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 ISO/IEC 27018:2019 ISO/IEC 42001:2023 PCI DSS SOC 2 TISAX VPAT Documents All Public Private Get access Bulk download Featured Documents REPORTS Penetrati...

    Read at https://trust.gitlab.com/

Source: https://trust.gitlab.com/ · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: Certifications named in Developer collaboration and CI: 26 of 58 companies

✓

security.txt (RFC 9116)

weight 1 of 3

Served at /.well-known/security.txt.

Source: https://gitlab.com/.well-known/security.txt · checked 2026-10-13

Across the market: security.txt (RFC 9116) in Developer collaboration and CI: 11 of 56 companies

History

100 0 2026-10-06: 17 of 1002026-10-13: 17 of 100 2026-10-06 2026-10-13
Score over the last 2 runs we measured GitLab in: 17 (2026-10-06), 17 (2026-10-13).

Prepare your vendor review

A source is a starting point. Check the product, plan, legal entity and date before treating it as evidence for your purchase. These questions do not change the transparency score.

GitLab

3 found · 9 not found · 0 not measured across 12 public checks.

12 of 12 criteria have a measured result from the last 30 days. Oldest dated result: 2026-10-13.

Investigate 9 open evidence questions
  1. Data processing agreement

    Please share the current data processing agreement for the product and plan we are considering, including its annexes and signing process.

    Inspect this check
  2. Subprocessor list

    Which subprocessors apply to our product, what does each process, and in which countries? Please share the current list.

    Inspect this check
  3. Data location stated

    Which locations apply to our primary data, backups and support access? Which region can we select for this plan?

    Inspect this check
  4. Status page with history

    Where can we review incident history for the service we will use, and how do we subscribe to incident updates?

    Inspect this check
  5. Public pricing

    Please confirm the total cost for our seats and usage, including minimum commitments, add-ons, overages and renewal terms.

    Inspect this check
  6. Uptime SLA with a figure

    Which availability commitment applies to our plan? Please include the measurement window, exclusions and credit claim process.

    Inspect this check
  7. No third-party tracking before consent

    Which third-party requests occur before a visitor makes a choice, and for what purpose? Please distinguish the public website from the product.

    Inspect this check
  8. Notice before subprocessors change

    How will you notify us before a subprocessor changes, with how much notice, and what response options apply to our contract?

    Inspect this check
  9. Named privacy contact

    Which privacy contact handles requests for our account, and what escalation path should we use?

    Inspect this check

Compare

A shortlist holds up to six vendors across categories and lives entirely in the address of its page: share the link, bookmark it, put it in a ticket. Nothing is stored, so we do not know it exists.