SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to HEAL Security

Other Threat intelligence vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at HEAL Security. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 31 that differ from HEAL Security on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

HEAL Security has 12 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at HEAL Security” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at HEAL SecurityFound at HEAL Security, not found there
Dataminrdataminr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dataminr 70/100 8 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +5 nothing Compare
Feedly Threat Intelligencefeedly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Feedly Threat Intelligence 48/100 7 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +4 nothing Compare
Intezerintezer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intezer 48/100 5 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +2 nothing Compare
Anomalianomali.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Anomali 43/100 5 Data location stated, Status page with history, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 nothing Compare
Cywarecyware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyware 39/100 5 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +2 nothing Compare
Censyscensys.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Censys 39/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 nothing Compare
IPinfoipinfo.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to IPinfo 39/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 nothing Compare
Pulsedivepulsedive.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsedive 39/100 4 Data location stated, Public pricing, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, +1 nothing Compare
Cyblecyble.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyble 22/100 4 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, security.txt (RFC 9116), +1 nothing Compare
Intel 471intel471.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intel 471 26/100 3 Subprocessor list, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact nothing Compare
Nisosnisos.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nisos 26/100 3 Data processing agreement, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact nothing Compare
Searchlight Cyberslcyber.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Searchlight Cyber 26/100 3 Data location stated, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Named privacy contact nothing 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.