Transparency alternatives to Intezer
Other Threat intelligence vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Intezer. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 34 that differ from Intezer on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Intezer has 7 gaps in what we could measure: Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Public pricing, Uptime SLA with a figure, No third-party tracking before consent, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Intezer” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Intezer | Found at Intezer, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feedly Threat Intelligencefeedly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Feedly Threat Intelligence | 48/100 | 5 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Uptime SLA with a figure, +2 | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Dataminrdataminr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dataminr | 70/100 | 3 Subprocessor list, Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | nothing | Compare |
| Anomalianomali.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Anomali | 43/100 | 2 Status page with history, Named privacy contact | 2 Data processing agreement, Certifications named | Compare |
| Censyscensys.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Censys | 39/100 | 2 Status page with history, Public pricing | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| IPinfoipinfo.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to IPinfo | 39/100 | 2 Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Certifications named, HTTPS enforced with HSTS, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Pulsedivepulsedive.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Pulsedive | 39/100 | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Intel 471intel471.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intel 471 | 26/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Cyblecyble.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyble | 22/100 | 2 security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Notice before subprocessors change | Compare |
| Recorded Futurerecordedfuture.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Recorded Future | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Validinvalidin.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Validin | 19/100 | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| GreyNoisegreynoise.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to GreyNoise | 17/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Certifications named, +1 | Compare |
| Cywarecyware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyware | 39/100 | 1 Named privacy contact | 1 Data location stated | 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.