Alternatives to Descope
Other Password and identity vendors we measure, sorted by how much they publish that Descope does not. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 24 that differ from Descope on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Descope has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “publishes and Descope does not” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Publishes, and Descope does not | Descope publishes, and they do not | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keeperkeepersecurity.com | 85/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Ping Identitypingidentity.com | 74/100 | 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +2 | 1 Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| 1Password1password.com | 70/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Clerkclerk.com | 70/100 | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +2 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Oktaokta.com | 61/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| WorkOSworkos.com | 60/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Status page with history, +1 | 2 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Duo Securityduo.com | 48/100 | 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named, +1 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Oryory.com | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Passboltpassbolt.com | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Fronteggfrontegg.com | 39/100 | 3 Data location stated, Status page with history, Certifications named | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| FusionAuthfusionauth.io | 39/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure | Compare |
| Yubicoyubico.com | 26/100 | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Subprocessor list, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, +1 | 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.