Transparency alternatives to Moki
Other Endpoint management and security vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Moki. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 36 that differ from Moki on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Moki has 12 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, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Moki” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Moki | Found at Moki, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Addigyaddigy.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Addigy | 87/100 | 10 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +7 | nothing | Compare |
| Malwarebytesmalwarebytes.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Malwarebytes | 83/100 | 9 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +6 | nothing | Compare |
| NinjaOneninjaone.comSee also Transparency alternatives to NinjaOne | 52/100 | 7 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| SentinelOnesentinelone.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SentinelOne | 48/100 | 7 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +4 | nothing | Compare |
| Hexnodehexnode.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hexnode | 62/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Esperesper.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Esper | 52/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Fleetfleetdm.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Fleet | 48/100 | 6 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Levellevel.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Level | 48/100 | 6 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Automoxautomox.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Automox | 43/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Scalefusionscalefusion.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Scalefusion | 43/100 | 6 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +3 | nothing | Compare |
| Jamfjamf.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Jamf | 35/100 | 5 Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, +2 | nothing | Compare |
| CrowdStrikecrowdstrike.comSee also Transparency alternatives to CrowdStrike | 30/100 | 5 Public pricing, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | 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.