SaaS Ranking

Transparency alternatives to HackerOne

Other Vulnerability management vendors we measure, sorted by how much we found at them and not at HackerOne. This is a comparison of disclosure, not of features or fitness.

12 shown of 39 that differ from HackerOne on at least one criterion we measured for both. Public transparency score, not a product or security rating.

HackerOne has 9 gaps in what we could measure: Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history, 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 HackerOne” is the one that closes them.

VendorScoreFound there, not found at HackerOneFound at HackerOne, not found there
Invictiinvicti.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Invicti 83/100 7 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Data location stated, +4 nothing Compare
Rapid7rapid7.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Rapid7 70/100 6 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Status page with history, +3 1 Certifications named Compare
Snyksnyk.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Snyk 61/100 5 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +2 nothing Compare
Intruderintruder.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Intruder 57/100 4 Data processing agreement, Data location stated, Public pricing, +1 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Sucurisucuri.netSee also Transparency alternatives to Sucuri 52/100 4 Data processing agreement, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 1 Certifications named Compare
Semgrepsemgrep.devSee also Transparency alternatives to Semgrep 48/100 4 Data location stated, Status page with history, Public pricing, +1 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Holm Securityholmsecurity.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Holm Security 52/100 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Status page with history nothing Compare
Arnicaarnica.ioSee also Transparency alternatives to Arnica 48/100 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing 1 Certifications named Compare
SonarSourcesonarsource.comSee also Transparency alternatives to SonarSource 48/100 3 Data processing agreement, Subprocessor list, Public pricing 1 Named privacy contact Compare
Detectifydetectify.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Detectify 43/100 3 Data processing agreement, Public pricing, security.txt (RFC 9116) nothing Compare
Patchstackpatchstack.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Patchstack 43/100 3 Subprocessor list, Data location stated, Public pricing 1 HTTPS enforced with HSTS Compare
Veracodeveracode.comSee also Transparency alternatives to Veracode 43/100 3 Subprocessor list, Status page with history, Notice before subprocessors change 1 Named privacy contact 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.