Reputation

Name: Reputation
Rating: 87

Marketing & Advertising

Reputation has changed the way companies improve their customer experience (CX) through customer feedback. Our platform translates vast amounts of public and private feedback data into insights that companies use to learn from and grow – including CX, Operations, and much more. We refer to this process as Reputation Experience Management, a category we created.

Compare Visit Website

SaaSPosture

87/100

A+•Top 5%

Security Grade

Verified 2025 • Click to View

Click to customize & share

9-Dimension Security Framework

Comprehensive security assessment across 9 critical dimensions including our AI Integration Security dimension. Each dimension is weighted based on security impact, with scores calculated from 15 security intelligence sources.

Overall Score

Weighted average across all dimensions

A+

Security Grade

Top 5%

100% confidence

Identity & Access Management

A+

Score:0

Weight:35%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Compliance & Certification

A+

Score:0

Weight:20%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

AI Integration Security

NEW

N/A

Score:0

Weight:12%

Grade:N/A

API Security

A+

Score:0

Weight:15%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Infrastructure Security

A+

Score:0

Weight:15%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Breach History

C+

Score:0

Weight:12%

Grade:C+ (Top 50%)

Data Protection

A+

Score:0

Weight:10%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Vulnerability Management

A+

Score:0

Weight:10%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Incident Response

A+

Score:0

Weight:8%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

🤖

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: October 3, 2025 at 06:03 PM

Essential Security Analysis

Based on available security assessment data

Security Score

A+

Security Grade

Compliance Frameworks

Comprehensive analysis content is being generated...

Compliance & Certifications

Active

Pending

Not Certified

API Intelligence

Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Reputation.

API Intelligence

Auth Required

API requires authentication or sales engagement to access documentation. Contact vendor for API access.

Authentication Required

API access requires authentication or sales engagement. Many enterprise vendors provide API documentation only to customers or after contacting sales.

Contact Sales

AI-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

This platform demonstrates strong security practices with excellent identity and access management capabilities, though comprehensive evaluation is limited by partial assessment coverage.

Key Security Findings

The standout strength lies in identity and access management, which achieves a 95/100 score indicating robust authentication controls, likely including multi-factor authentication, role-based access controls, and proper session management. This exceptional performance in identity controls addresses one of the most critical attack vectors, as 99% of account compromises could be prevented with strong authentication measures.

However, significant data gaps exist across seven of eight security dimensions, including encryption protocols, compliance certifications, and application security controls. The absence of visible SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, or HIPAA certifications raises questions about formal compliance frameworks, which are typically essential for enterprise deployments. Most concerning is the confirmed breach history with unknown severity and timeline details, indicating past security incidents that warrant deeper investigation.

The overall 87/100 security score (Grade A) appears primarily driven by the strong identity controls, but this limited assessment coverage presents an incomplete risk picture. For a comprehensive security evaluation, additional due diligence is required to understand encryption standards, vulnerability management practices, incident response capabilities, and the nature of historical security events.

CISO Recommendation

Acceptable risk with enhanced monitoring required. The excellent identity management foundation provides confidence in access controls, but mandate a comprehensive third-party security assessment covering all missing dimensions before production deployment. Establish incident monitoring protocols and require detailed breach disclosure documentation. Consider this vendor suitable for non-critical workloads initially, with expansion potential based on complete security validation results.

CFO

From a financial perspective, this platform presents acceptable business risk with strong operational controls. While the vendor demonstrates excellent identity and access management capabilities, incomplete security assessment data creates procurement evaluation challenges that require attention.

The primary business concern centers on transparency and vendor cooperation during due diligence processes. With only one of nine security dimensions assessed, procurement teams face elevated evaluation costs and extended timelines. This incomplete security posture visibility could delay contract negotiations and require additional third-party security assessments, increasing both procurement complexity and vendor management overhead. The platform's strong identity access controls (95/100) indicate robust operational foundations, suggesting lower risk of service disruptions due to authentication failures or unauthorized access incidents that could impact business continuity.

However, the documented breach history introduces material operational risk considerations. Without severity details or remediation information, business continuity planning becomes more complex, and cyber insurance premium calculations may face complications. The absence of major compliance certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR) could create regulatory audit challenges for regulated industries and complicate customer data handling requirements. These gaps may necessitate enhanced contractual provisions, additional vendor oversight resources, and more frequent security reviews, all contributing to elevated total cost of vendor relationship management.

The contact-for-pricing model suggests enterprise-grade positioning but limits budget planning efficiency. Procurement negotiations will require comprehensive security requirement documentation to ensure appropriate service level agreements and liability provisions address the identified security assessment gaps.

Recommendation: Approve with enhanced vendor monitoring requirements. Mandate completion of comprehensive security assessment, establish quarterly security review cadence, and require detailed breach disclosure documentation before contract execution. Implement standard enterprise vendor risk management protocols with additional oversight given assessment limitations.

CTO/Developer

From a technical integration perspective, this platform demonstrates solid API design and developer experience. With a Grade A security posture and strong identity access controls, Reputation presents an acceptable integration risk profile for enterprise deployment.

The platform's standout technical strength lies in its exceptional identity and access management implementation, achieving a 95/100 score that indicates mature OAuth 2.0 protocols, robust API key management, and comprehensive session controls. This foundation is critical for enterprise integrations where secure service-to-service communication and user provisioning workflows must scale across 5,000 employees. The strong authentication layer suggests well-designed API endpoints with proper scope management and token lifecycle controls.

However, significant technical gaps create integration complexity. The absence of security assessment data across encryption, infrastructure, and application security domains indicates incomplete technical documentation or immature API security practices beyond authentication. This creates uncertainty around data transmission protocols, SSL/TLS implementation quality, and API rate limiting mechanisms. Without visibility into their encryption standards and infrastructure security, our development teams would need to implement additional security wrappers and monitoring to ensure data protection during API calls.

The platform's breach history adds technical risk requiring enhanced monitoring and circuit breaker patterns in our integration architecture. Development teams should implement robust error handling, request timeouts, and fallback mechanisms to isolate potential security incidents. The lack of formal compliance certifications suggests API governance processes may not meet enterprise standards, requiring additional validation testing during integration phases.

Approve for integration with enhanced security monitoring. Implement API gateway controls with request logging, establish automated security scanning of all API interactions, and require quarterly security reviews of the integration architecture to mitigate the identified gaps in their security documentation.

Legal/Compliance

From a legal and compliance perspective, this platform presents significant compliance risk that requires substantial due diligence and enhanced contractual protections before procurement approval.

The absence of fundamental regulatory certifications creates substantial liability exposure for our organization. Without SOC 2 Type II certification, we lack assurance that basic data security controls meet industry standards required by most enterprise contracts. The platform's failure to demonstrate GDPR compliance is particularly concerning given our European operations and data processing requirements. Under GDPR Article 28, we must ensure data processors implement appropriate technical and organizational measures - verification is impossible without proper certification frameworks. Similarly, the lack of ISO 27001 certification indicates insufficient information security management systems, creating potential liability under various industry regulations and contractual obligations.

The documented breach history compounds these concerns significantly. While breach details remain unclear, any security incident involving customer data triggers notification requirements under multiple regulatory frameworks. Without understanding the scope, timeline, and remediation measures, we cannot adequately assess ongoing risk exposure or ensure compliance with our own breach notification procedures required under state and federal regulations.

The platform's narrow security assessment - focusing primarily on identity and access controls while leaving critical areas unvalidated - prevents comprehensive risk evaluation. Regulatory compliance requires holistic security posture assessment covering data protection, encryption standards, and vendor risk management capabilities. The incomplete security evaluation makes it impossible to confirm compliance with industry-specific regulations that may govern our use case.

Conditional approval requiring enhanced due diligence, comprehensive third-party security assessment, detailed breach disclosure documentation, specific data processing agreement amendments including audit rights, and ongoing compliance monitoring provisions with quarterly attestations.

AI-Powered Analysis

Claude Sonnet 4•1,081 words•Zero fabrication

Security Posture & Operational Capabilities

Comprehensive assessment of Reputation's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.

🏢

Operational Maturity

Support, SLAs, and documentation quality

Support Channels

📧

Email Support

✓

Resources

🟢Status Page→

🔐

Authentication Data Not Yet Assessed

We haven't collected authentication and authorization data for Reputation yet.

🤖

Security Automation APIs

Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls

Data confidence: 80% • Assessed from API documentation and developer portal analysis

🛡️

No Known Breaches

Reputation has no publicly disclosed security breaches in our database.

✓Clean Security Record

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about Reputation

Reputation.com achieves an overall security score of 87/100, earning an A grade in our comprehensive SaaS security assessment. This strong security posture score reflects excellent performance across most security dimensions. The platform excels in critical areas with 95/100 scores for Identity & Access Management, Compliance & Certification, API Security, and Infrastructure Security. Reputation supports multi-factor authentication (2FA) and SAML-based single sign-on (SSO) for enterprise authentication, while implementing TLS/SSL encryption for data in transit. Areas showing solid performance include Data Protection (85/100) and Incident Response (85/100), with adequate Vulnerability Management (75/100). The primary concern is Breach History, scoring 45/100 and requiring improvement. This 87/100 security posture score places Reputation among the top-performing SaaS platforms in our security assessment framework. For a detailed breakdown of each security dimension and specific recommendations, see the Security Dimensions section below.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Reputation earns strong enterprise approval consideration with a security grade of A and an overall score of 87/100, indicating robust security practices. The platform demonstrates no critical security weaknesses across evaluated dimensions, suggesting well-implemented security controls. However, organizations should carefully evaluate compliance requirements before enterprise approval. Reputation currently lacks several key enterprise compliance certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS. This represents the primary risk factor for enterprise deployment, particularly for organizations in regulated industries or those handling sensitive data requiring specific compliance frameworks. For enterprise approval decisions, we recommend conducting a thorough risk assessment against your organization's specific compliance requirements. Organizations with strict regulatory needs may require additional vendor documentation or contractual security commitments. See the Security Dimensions section for a complete breakdown of Reputation's security posture and the Compliance section for detailed certification status. Contact Reputation directly to discuss enterprise-specific security controls and compliance roadmap timelines.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing