Transparency alternatives to Pulsedive
Other Threat intelligence vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at Pulsedive. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.
12 shown of 34 that differ from Pulsedive on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.
Pulsedive has 8 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, Uptime SLA with a figure, security.txt (RFC 9116), Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact. The column “Found there, not found at Pulsedive” is the one that closes them.
| Vendor | Score | Found there, not found at Pulsedive | Found at Pulsedive, not found there | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dataminrdataminr.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Dataminr | 70/100 | 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Certifications named, +3 | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Feedly Threat Intelligencefeedly.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Feedly Threat Intelligence | 48/100 | 6 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Certifications named, +3 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cywarecyware.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyware | 39/100 | 4 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change, +1 | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Intezerintezer.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intezer | 48/100 | 3 Data processing agreement, Certifications named, Notice before subprocessors change | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Anomalianomali.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Anomali | 43/100 | 3 Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change, Named privacy contact | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Cyblecyble.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Cyble | 22/100 | 3 Certifications named, security.txt (RFC 9116), Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| IPinfoipinfo.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to IPinfo | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 2 HTTPS enforced with HSTS, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Nisosnisos.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Nisos | 39/100 | 2 Data processing agreement, Named privacy contact | 2 Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Intel 471intel471.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Intel 471 | 26/100 | 2 Subprocessor list, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| Recorded Futurerecordedfuture.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Recorded Future | 22/100 | 2 Status page with history, security.txt (RFC 9116) | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| GreyNoisegreynoise.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to GreyNoise | 17/100 | 2 Uptime SLA with a figure, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | Compare |
| ReversingLabsreversinglabs.comSee also Transparency alternatives to ReversingLabs | 17/100 | 2 Certifications named, Named privacy contact | 3 Data location stated, Public pricing, No third-party tracking before consent | 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.