Transparency alternatives to Oasis Security
Other Identity governance vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Oasis Security. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 25 that differ from Oasis Security on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Oasis Security has 6 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116). The column “Found there, not found at Oasis Security” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Oasis Security | Found at Oasis Security, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hyprhypr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Hypr | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Access Owlaccessowl.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Access Owl | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Imprivataimprivata.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Imprivata | 43/100 | 2 Data location stated, Status page with history | 4 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Avatieravatier.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Avatier | 30/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| GAT Labsgatlabs.comSee also Transparency alternatives to GAT Labs | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 5 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 | Compare |
| Simeiosimeio.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Simeio | 35/100 | 1 Data location stated | 4 Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Beta Systemsbetasystems.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Beta Systems | 29/100 | 1 Data location stated | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Clear Skyeclearskye.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Clear Skye | 26/100 | 1 Data location stated | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Identityautomationidentityautomation.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Identityautomation | 26/100 | 1 Status page with history | 3 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Ipgipg-group.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ipg | 23/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | Compare |
| Gluugluu.orgSee also Transparency alternatives to Gluu | 22/100 | 1 No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Uptime SLA with a figure, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | Compare |
| Radiantlogicradiantlogic.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Radiantlogic | 22/100 | 1 Data location stated | 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 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.