Proofy.io Security Assessment
AI & Machine Learning
Proofy is an email verification and email list cleaning solution.
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 16, 2026 at 07:06 AM
Assessment Transparency
See exactly what data backs this security assessment
Data Coverage
7/8 security categories assessed
Score based on 7 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 Proofy.io 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 | F | Needs Improvement |
| Risk Level | High | Not recommended |
| Enterprise Readiness | 42% | 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 |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 25/100 | needs_improvement | URGENT: Implement compensating controls immediately |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Data Protection | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Implement encryption at rest, TLS/HTTPS, and 1 more |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 0/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
Overall Grade: F (29/100)
Critical Security Gaps
| Gap | Severity | Business Impact | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🟢 No dedicated security documentation page | LOW | Extended due diligence process | Request security whitepaper or public audit reports |
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 | ✅ 8/10 | No SDKs |
| SLA Commitment | ❌ None | No public SLA |
| API Versioning | ⚠️ None | No version control |
| Support Channels | ℹ️ 2 channels | Email, Chat |
Operational Facts Extracted: 6 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 |
Security Incident History
| Status | Details |
|---|---|
| ✅ No Known Breaches | No security incidents found in public breach databases |
Note: Clean security record based on public breach intelligence sources
⚠️ 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 Proofy.io 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
- ●The Single Email Verification API is limited to 1000 requests per minute
- ●Webhook Trigger Integration
- ●Rate limiting
- ●Webhooks
⚠️Security Gaps & Recommendations
- ●No oauth scopes
- ●No token expiration
- ●No token rotation
- ●No service accounts
- ●No mfa enforcement
- ●No pii redaction
- ●No training opt out
- ●No data residency
- ●No gdpr compliance
- ●No read only tokens
AI Integration Security evaluates whether Proofy.io 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
communityProofy.io supports Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) for secure AI agent integration.
View MCP Server💡Recommendations
- →⚠️ Official MCP server not found. Best alternative: https://github.com/awslabs/mcp/issues/1185 (Trust: 50/100)
- →⚠️ ⚠️ Use with caution - review code before use
- →⚠️ Limited AI capabilities - consider alternatives
AI Readiness measures whether Proofy.ioprovides 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 Proofy.io.
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.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Proofy.io's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.
Operational Maturity
Support, SLAs, and documentation quality
Support Channels
Documentation Quality
80% • ExcellentSecurity Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
No Known Breaches
Proofy.io has no publicly disclosed security breaches in our database.
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Proofy.io
While API references delve into the technical details of individual functions, API documentation offers a more holistic perspective. It includes the API reference information but expands upon it with additional explanations, usage guidelines, and best practices.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
With Postman, you can: Automatically generate API documentation: Postman enables users to automatically generate API documentation for any OpenAPI 3.0 definition, as well as for any collection they create.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
It's a concise reference manual containing all the information required to work with the API, with details about the functions, classes, return types, arguments and more, supported by tutorials and examples.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Documentation should cater to the API users, typically developers, and the relatively less technical API evaluators, typically Product Managers and CTOs.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Proofy.io stack up against similar applications in AI & Machine Learning? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.
| Application | Overall ScoreScore↓ | Grade | AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅ | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
56/100🏆 | B+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
49/100 | C+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
39/100 | D+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
36/100 | D+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
Proofy.ioCurrent | 29/100 | F | 5.2/100 | |
28/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
11 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.