SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to Filigran

Other SIEM and security operations vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Filigran. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 38 that differ from Filigran on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

Filigran has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, 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 Filigran” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at FiligranFound at Filigran, not found there
Expelexpel.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Expel 61/100 6 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +3 1 Status page with history Compare
Trend Microtrendmicro.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Trend Micro 48/100 5 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing, +2 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Huntresshuntress.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Huntress 57/100 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, Certifications named, +1 nothing Compare
Corocoro.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Coro 43/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Ontinueontinue.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Ontinue 43/100 4 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 2 Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Pantherpanther.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Panther 43/100 4 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +1 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact Compare
Securonixsecuronix.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Securonix 39/100 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact Compare
Gigamongigamon.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Gigamon 35/100 3 Data location stated, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) 1 Status page with history Compare
Blumirablumira.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Blumira 30/100 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure 1 Status page with history Compare
Atomicorp Atomic OSSECatomicorp.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Atomicorp Atomic OSSEC 26/100 3 Public pricing, Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116) 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact Compare
Cynetcynet.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cynet 30/100 2 Data processing agreement, Certifications named 1 Status page with history Compare
Upstream Securityupstream.autoSee also Transparency alternatives to Upstream Security 30/100 2 Data location stated, Certifications named 1 Status page with history 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.