Transparency alternatives to Palo Alto Networks
Other Network monitoring vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Palo Alto Networks. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 35 that differ from Palo Alto Networks on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Palo Alto Networks has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change. The column “Found there, not found at Palo Alto Networks” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Palo Alto Networks | Found at Palo Alto Networks, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kentikkentik.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Kentik | 70/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, +2 | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Auvikauvik.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Auvik | 52/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Paesslerpaessler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Paessler | 43/100 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Status page with history | Compare |
| Zscalerzscaler.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Zscaler | 43/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Notice before subprocessors change | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| LogicMonitorlogicmonitor.comSee also Transparency alternatives to LogicMonitor | 39/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Catchpointcatchpoint.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Catchpoint | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| WatchGuardwatchguard.comSee also Transparency alternatives to WatchGuard | 39/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 1 Certifications named | Compare |
| Ubiquitiui.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ubiquiti | 35/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | Compare |
| Cambiumcambiumnetworks.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cambium | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Nagiosnagios.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nagios | 26/100 | 2 Data location stated, Public pricing | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Icingaicinga.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Icinga | 22/100 | 2 Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | Compare |
| Securepointsecurepoint.deSee also Transparency alternatives to Securepoint | 17/100 | 2 No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Status page with history, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS | 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.