Titan Security Assessment
AI & Machine Learning
Titan is the first professional email suite that helps you build deeper, more meaningful relationships with your customers.
9-Dimension Security Framework
Identity & Access Management
API Security
AI Integration Security
NEWInfrastructure 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 07:12 AM
Assessment Transparency
See exactly what data backs this security assessment
Data Coverage
6/8 security categories assessed
Score based on 6 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
Comprehensive Security Analysis
In-depth assessment with detailed recommendations
Security Analysis
Executive Summary
| Metric | Value | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Security Grade | D | Needs Improvement |
| Risk Level | High | Not recommended |
| Enterprise Readiness | 43% | 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 |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 API Security | 50/100 | needs_improvement | Add rate limiting and authentication |
| 🟠 Data Protection | 35/100 | needs_improvement | Implement encryption at rest, TLS/HTTPS, and 1 more |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 30/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 25/100 | needs_improvement | URGENT: Implement compensating controls immediately |
Overall Grade: D (33/100)
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 | ✅ Available | https://status.titan.email |
| Documentation Quality | ❌ 0/10 | No SDKs |
| SLA Commitment | ✅ Published | Formal SLA available |
| API Versioning | ✅ Yes | Breaking changes managed |
| Support Channels | ℹ️ 0 channels |
Operational Facts Extracted: 5 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 |
Authentication Capabilities
| Method | Tier Requirement | Evidence Source |
|---|---|---|
| ✅ SSO (SAML/OAuth) | Enterprise | sso_discovery (90% confidence) |
Authentication Facts Extracted: 0 data points from auth_evidence enrichment
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
API Intelligence
Production-ready code examples for security operations, extracted from official Titan API documentation using LLM analysis. Copy and paste these examples directly into your automation workflows.
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 Titan's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.
Operational Maturity
Support, SLAs, and documentation quality
Resources
Authentication Data Not Yet Assessed
We haven't collected authentication and authorization data for Titan yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
No Known Breaches
Titan has no publicly disclosed security breaches in our database.
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Titan
The SP can then use the information in the SAML assertion to grant or deny access to its resources based on predefined policies. SAML is widely adopted in various industries and is supported by many i
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
SAML is an open standard XML technology that allows identity providers, like Microsoft Entra ID to pass authentication data to a service provider, such as a software as a service app. Single sign-on i
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
The SAML specification defines three roles: the principal (typically a human user), the identity provider (IdP) and the service provider (SP). In the primary use case addressed by SAML, the principal
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
SAML functions by passing user attributes or credentials between the IdP and the SP. Each user logs in once to sign on with the IdP, then the IdP passes the SAML attributes to the SP at the moment the
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Titan 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 | |
TitanCurrent | 33/100 | D | N/A | |
28/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
8 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.
Research Sources
40 citations for Titan
Data from static JSON · Last enriched: October 8, 2025