SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Keepnet Labs

Other Email security vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Keepnet Labs. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 37 that differ from Keepnet Labs on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Keepnet Labs has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Keepnet Labs” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at Keepnet LabsFound at Keepnet Labs, not found there
URIportsuriports.comSee also Transparency alternatives to URIports 70/100 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Hoxhunthoxhunt.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hoxhunt 61/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +2 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact Compare
Red Siftredsift.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Red Sift 83/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +1 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Riottryriot.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Riot 65/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 nothing Compare
SoSafesosafe-awareness.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SoSafe 65/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +1 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
MailRoutemailroute.netSee also Transparency alternatives to MailRoute 61/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Abnormalabnormalsecurity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Abnormal 52/100 4 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 1 Public pricing Compare
Pauboxpaubox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Paubox 48/100 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named 1 security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Cofensecofense.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cofense 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change 3 Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116) Compare
Retarusretarus.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Retarus 39/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent 2 Public pricing, Named privacy contact Compare
PowerDMARCpowerdmarc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to PowerDMARC 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact Compare
Sendmarcsendmarc.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Sendmarc 35/100 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change 3 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116), 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.