Transparency alternatives to Amberlo
Other Legal practice management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Amberlo. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 49 that differ from Amberlo on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Amberlo has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Amberlo” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Amberlo | Found at Amberlo, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luminanceluminance.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Luminance | 65/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 Public pricing | Compare |
| Cerenadecerenade.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cerenade | 48/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Litifylitify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Litify | 48/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Public pricing, Certifications named | Compare |
| Smokeballsmokeball.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Smokeball | 35/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Aderantaderant.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Aderant | 30/100 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| MyCasemycase.comSee also Transparency alternatives to MyCase | 30/100 | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named | Compare |
| LawWarelawware.co.ukSee also Transparency alternatives to LawWare | 17/100 | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | Compare |
| Assembly Neosassemblysoftware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Assembly Neos | 35/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data processing agreement, Certifications named | Compare |
| Matters.Cloudmatters.cloudSee also Transparency alternatives to Matters.Cloud | 35/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Eliteelite.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Elite | 30/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 2 Data processing agreement, Public pricing | Compare |
| Filevinefilevine.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Filevine | 30/100 | 1 Subprocessor list | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Tabs3tabs3.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Tabs3 | 30/100 | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, 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.