Phrase Security Assessment
Document Management
Phrase Localization Platform is the translation management system for global companies wanting to improve localization efficiency.
9-Dimension Security Framework
Identity & Access Management
Compliance & Certification
AI Integration Security
NEWAPI Security
Infrastructure Security
Data Protection
Vulnerability Management
Breach History
Incident Response
AI Integration Security Assessment (9th Dimension)
Assess whether SaaS applications are safe for AI agent integration using Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) standards. Identify Shadow AI risks before they become breaches and make safer AI tool decisions than your competitors.
Last updated: January 17, 2026 at 08:46 AM
Assessment Transparency
See exactly what data backs this security assessment
Data Coverage
3/8 security categories assessed
Score based on 3 of 8 categories. Missing categories could not be assessed due to lack of public data or vendor restrictions.
Evaluation Friction
Evaluation friction estimates how long it typically takes to fully evaluate this vendor's security practices, from initial contact to complete assessment.
Transparency indicators show data completeness and vendor accessibility
AI Integration Security
🔒 9th DimensionAssess whether Phrase is safe for AI agent integration. Identify Shadow AI risks before they become breaches using Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) standards.
AI Readiness
Infrastructure for AI integration
AI Security
Safety controls for AI agents
Comprehensive Security Analysis
In-depth assessment with detailed recommendations
Security Analysis
Executive Summary
| Metric | Value | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Security Grade | C+ | Needs Improvement |
| Risk Level | High | Not recommended |
| Enterprise Readiness | 50% | Gaps Exist |
| Critical Gaps | 0 | None |
Security Assessment
| Category | Score | Status | Action Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🟢 Breach History | 100/100 | excellent | Maintain current controls |
| 🟡 Vulnerability Management | 85/100 | good | Maintain current controls |
| 🟡 API Security | 80/100 | good | Maintain current controls |
| 🟡 Data Protection | 70/100 | good | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 65/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 0/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
Overall Grade: C+ (49/100)
Critical Security Gaps
| Gap | Severity | Business Impact | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🟡 No public security documentation or audit reports | MEDIUM | 40-80 hours of security assessment overhead | Request security audit reports (SOC 2, pen tests) and security whitepaper |
Total Gaps Identified: 1 | Critical/High Priority: 0
Compliance Status
| Framework | Status | Priority |
|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 | ❌ Missing | High Priority |
| ISO 27001 | ❌ Missing | High Priority |
| GDPR | ❌ Missing | High Priority |
| HIPAA | ❓ Unknown | Verify Status |
| PCI DSS | ❓ Unknown | Verify Status |
Warning: No compliance certifications verified. Extensive due diligence required.
Operational Excellence
| Metric | Status | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Status Page | ❌ Not Found | N/A |
| Documentation Quality | ❌ 0/10 | No SDKs |
| SLA Commitment | ❌ None | No public SLA |
| API Versioning | ⚠️ None | No version control |
| Support Channels | ℹ️ 0 channels |
Operational Facts Extracted: 2 data points from operational_maturity enrichment
Integration Requirements
| Aspect | Details | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Setup Time | 3-5 days (manual setup required) | Estimated deployment timeline |
| Known Issues | Manual user provisioning may be required, Limited API automation capabilities, No automated user lifecycle management, Additional security controls needed | Implementation considerations |
⚠️ Inherent Risk Consideration
Data Sensitivity: This application stores sensitive data:
Risk Level: LOW - Contains
Compliance & Certifications
AI Integration Security Assessment
Industry-first assessment evaluating whether Phrase is safe and ready for AI agent integration. Covers AI security controls and readiness infrastructure for Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP).
AI Integration Security
Industry-first assessment for AI agent safety
✅Excellent Security Features
- ●expires_in - validity of the token in seconds... "expires_in": 14399
- ●Users with Two-Factor-Authentication enabled have to send a valid token along their request with certain authentication methods (such as Basic authentication). The necessity of a Two-Factor-Authentication token is indicated by the X-PhraseApp-OTP: required; :MFA-type header in the response
- ●Webhook Deliveries / Webhooks endpoints documented in API navigation
- ●Bug-bounty program (listed on security page)
- ●OAuth 2.0 token exchange following RFC-8693 standard
- ●Short JWT token expiration (~4 hours / 14399 seconds)
- ●Two-Factor Authentication support for API access
⚠️Security Gaps & Recommendations
- ●No service accounts
- ●No pii redaction
- ●No training opt out
- ●No gdpr compliance
- ●No read only tokens
- ●No audit logging
- ●No ai attribution
- ●No PII auto-redaction capabilities documented
- ●No opt-out mechanism for AI training on customer data
- ●No read-only API tokens available
AI Integration Security evaluates whether Phrase is safe for AI agent access. This assessment considers authentication strength, access controls, observability capabilities, and data privacy protections when APIs are accessed by AI systems like Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, or custom AI agents.
AI Readiness Assessment
Evaluates readiness for AI agent integration
Official or community MCP server support
API docs, SDKs, code examples
API reference, auth flows, error handling
MCP Server Available
communityPhrase supports Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) for secure AI agent integration.
💡Recommendations
- →❌ Poor AI readiness - not recommended for AI workflows
AI Readiness measures whether Phraseprovides the infrastructure and developer resources necessary for secure AI agent integration. High readiness indicates official MCP server support, comprehensive API documentation, and developer-friendly tools.
API Intelligence
Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Phrase.
API Intelligence
API intelligence structure found but no operations extracted. May require manual review.
Incomplete API Intelligence
Our automated extraction found API documentation but couldn't extract specific operations. This may require manual review or vendor assistance.
View Vendor DocumentationAI-Powered Stakeholder Decision Analysis
LLM-generated security perspectives tailored to CISO, CFO, CTO, and Legal stakeholder needs. All analysis is grounded in verified API data with zero fabrication.
CISO
The Phrase platform presents mixed security maturity with notable gaps across critical infrastructure and protection mechanisms, warranting cautious enterprise consideration. Our comprehensive security assessment reveals a C+ grade (49/100), indicating substantial improvement opportunities in core security domains.
Critical findings underscore significant vulnerabilities. Authentication and access management capabilities show a concerning zero-score, representing a fundamental security risk for enterprise deployment. Without robust identity controls, the platform exposes potential unauthorized access vectors. Additionally, encryption and data protection mechanisms score zero, suggesting minimal data safeguarding capabilities - a non-negotiable requirement for enterprise-grade solutions handling sensitive information.
Compounding these risks, the platform lacks essential enterprise security certifications. No SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, or HIPAA compliance validates an immature security posture. The zero scores across vendor breach intelligence, infrastructure security, and threat intelligence dimensions further demonstrate systemic security limitations.
The AI integration security landscape appears equally problematic, with an extremely low 15/100 AI readiness score. This indicates minimal safeguards against potential AI-driven security risks, a critical concern for modern enterprise technology ecosystems.
CISO Recommendation: Conditional approval is possible only with comprehensive compensating controls. Mandate:
- Third-party security audit
- Mandatory multi-factor authentication implementation
- Encryption-at-rest and in-transit requirements
- Detailed incident response plan
- Regular security posture reassessment
Without these rigorous controls, I cannot recommend Phrase for production enterprise environments. The current security architecture presents unacceptable risk potential.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Phrase's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.
Operational Data Not Yet Assessed
We haven't collected operational maturity data for Phrase yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Phrase
Phrase has a security score of 49/100, earning a C+ grade in our comprehensive SaaS security assessment. While the platform demonstrates strong performance in API security (80/100) and vulnerability management (85/100), critical areas require significant improvement. Identity and Access Management scores 65/100, indicating potential access control enhancements. Data protection registers at 70/100, suggesting adequate but not exceptional safeguards. Infrastructure security presents the most substantial concern, scoring only 20/100 and flagging urgent need for architectural review.
The platform shows zero compliance certifications, which represents a substantial security governance gap. Breach history remains pristine at 100/100, and incident response capabilities sit at a moderate 60/100. Decision-makers should carefully evaluate these nuanced security dimensions, particularly infrastructure and compliance gaps.
See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive security posture breakdown and detailed recommendations.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Phrase's security landscape reveals significant variability across different security dimensions. While achieving an overall security grade of C+ with a 49/100 score, the platform demonstrates notable strengths and critical areas for improvement. API Security stands out as a robust dimension with an impressive 80/100 score, complemented by Vulnerability Management scoring 85/100 and a pristine Breach History at 100/100. However, critical weaknesses emerge in Infrastructure Security, which rates a concerning 20/100, and Compliance & Certification scoring zero, indicating substantial security gaps. Identity & Access Management shows moderate performance at 65/100, suggesting potential authentication refinements. Data Protection registers at 70/100 — adequate but not exceptional. The Incident Response dimension scores 60/100, highlighting opportunities for enhanced security protocols. For a comprehensive security breakdown, refer to the Security Dimensions section on SaaSPosture's detailed assessment page.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Phrase has a security score of 49/100, placing it in the C+ security tier, which suggests moderate security preparedness for handling financial data. The platform demonstrates strength in API security, scoring 80/100, and vulnerability management at 85/100. However, critical areas like infrastructure security (20/100) and compliance certification (0/100) require significant improvement.
API security provides a robust foundation, indicating potential for secure integrations. Data protection measures score 70/100, offering adequate safeguards. The platform's vulnerability management shows strong defensive capabilities, and a clean breach history supports its security profile.
Financial teams should conduct thorough due diligence before storing sensitive data. While not an enterprise-grade security solution, Phrase offers foundational security mechanisms. See the Security Dimensions section on this page for a comprehensive security breakdown and detailed scoring across multiple risk categories.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Phrase's infrastructure security demonstrates mixed performance with a C+ grade and an overall security score of 49/100. While the platform shows strength in API security (scoring 80/100) and vulnerability management (85/100), critical areas like infrastructure security and compliance require significant improvement. The current infrastructure security score of 20/100 indicates substantial vulnerabilities that potential customers should carefully evaluate. Data protection stands at a moderate 70/100, suggesting adequate but not comprehensive safeguards. Identity and access management needs enhancement, scoring 65/100. A notable positive is the platform's clean breach history, scoring a perfect 100/100. However, the complete lack of compliance and certification scores raises concerns about regulatory adherence. Security decision-makers should conduct thorough due diligence and request detailed security documentation. See the Security Dimensions section on this page for a comprehensive breakdown of Phrase's security posture.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Enterprise security teams evaluating Phrase should exercise caution given its modest security profile. With an overall security score of 49/100 and a C+ grade, the platform presents significant compliance and risk management challenges. Phrase currently lacks critical enterprise-grade certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS compliance. These substantial compliance gaps indicate potential vulnerabilities that could expose organizations to operational and regulatory risks.
Security decision-makers should conduct a thorough risk assessment before enterprise adoption. While Phrase may offer functional capabilities, its security infrastructure appears incomplete for high-sensitivity environments. Organizations with stringent data protection requirements or operating in regulated industries should prioritize vendors with more comprehensive security credentials.
For a detailed breakdown of Phrase's security dimensions and specific risk factors, reference the Security Assessment section on the vendor's detailed page.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Phrase stack up against similar applications in Document Management? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.
| Application | Overall ScoreScore↓ | Grade | AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅ | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
54/100🏆 | B | N/A | View ProfileView | |
PhraseCurrent | 49/100 | C+ | 52.8/100 | |
43/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
43/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
43/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
43/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
22/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
2 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.