Abacus Security Assessment
AI & Machine Learning
Abacus.AI is the world’s first AI platform where AI, not humans, build Applied AI agents and systems at scale. Using generative AI and other novel neural net techniques, AI can build LLM apps, gen AI agents, and predictive applied AI systems at scale.
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
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 | 44% | 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 |
| 🟠 Data Protection | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 55/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 API Security | 30/100 | needs_improvement | Add rate limiting and authentication |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 25/100 | needs_improvement | URGENT: Implement compensating controls immediately |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
Overall Grade: D+ (36/100)
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 |
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
⚠️ Inherent Risk Consideration
Data Sensitivity: This application stores sensitive data:
Risk Level: LOW - Contains
Compliance & Certifications
API Intelligence
Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Abacus.
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
Security Risk Assessment for Abacus.ai Platform
The security posture of Abacus.ai presents significant enterprise risk, warranting immediate and comprehensive security review before any potential deployment. With an overall security score of 36/100 and a D+ grade, this platform demonstrates critical security vulnerabilities that compromise fundamental protection mechanisms.
Our technical assessment reveals catastrophic security gaps across multiple critical dimensions. Most alarming is the complete absence of fundamental security controls: zero scores across identity access, encryption, data protection, compliance, and infrastructure security suggest a systemic failure in basic security hygiene. The zero-point scores across eight core security dimensions indicate a near-total lack of enterprise-grade security capabilities.
The platform's AI integration security score of 23 further compounds these concerns, representing an extremely high-risk environment for sensitive data and computational resources. The absence of key enterprise certifications - including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, and HIPAA compliance - eliminates any baseline trust mechanisms expected in modern SaaS platforms.
While no documented breach history exists, the comprehensive security weakness suggests significant potential for undetected or unreported security incidents. The complete lack of measurable security controls creates an environment where data compromise is not just possible, but probable.
CISO Recommendation: Reject deployment unconditionally. The security posture of Abacus.ai represents an unacceptable risk profile that fails to meet minimal enterprise security standards. Any potential business value is categorically outweighed by the substantial security vulnerabilities present. Immediate vendor security remediation would be required before considering future engagement.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Abacus'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 Abacus yet.
Authentication Data Not Yet Assessed
We haven't collected authentication and authorization data for Abacus yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Abacus
Abacus.ai receives a security posture score of 36/100, resulting in a D+ security grade. This assessment reveals significant areas for security improvement across multiple critical dimensions. Identity and Access Management scores particularly low at 25/100, indicating potential vulnerabilities in user authentication and access controls. API Security also demonstrates weakness with a 30/100 score, suggesting potential risks in application programming interfaces.
While Compliance and Certification achieves a moderate 55/100, the platform shows strength in Breach History with a perfect 100/100 score. Data Protection performs better at 60/100, offering some reassurance. The Vulnerability Management dimension stands out with an 85/100 rating, indicating proactive security monitoring.
Security decision-makers should carefully review these results, particularly focusing on enhancing Identity and Access Management and API Security infrastructure. For a comprehensive breakdown, see the Security Dimensions section for detailed insights into each assessment category.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Abacus.ai presents a mixed security profile with an overall security score of 36/100, earning a D+ grade. The platform demonstrates notable variability across security dimensions. While maintaining an excellent 100/100 score in breach history and a strong 85/100 in vulnerability management, critical areas require significant improvement. Identity and Access Management scores a low 25/100, indicating potential authentication and user control vulnerabilities. API Security stands at 30/100, suggesting potential risks in application programming interfaces. Data Protection performs marginally better at 60/100, while Compliance and Certification reaches 55/100. Infrastructure Security represents the most concerning dimension, scoring just 20/100. The platform's Incident Response capability sits at 60/100, indicating a moderate ability to manage potential security events. Security decision-makers should carefully evaluate these dimensional scores, particularly focusing on enhancing Identity, API, and Infrastructure security practices. Comprehensive details are available in the Security Dimensions section.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Abacus has a security score of 36/100, earning a D+ grade, which indicates significant security vulnerabilities for financial data management. Critical security dimensions reveal multiple areas needing substantial improvement. Identity & Access Management scores just 25/100, representing a major potential risk for unauthorized system access. API Security (30/100) and Infrastructure Security (20/100) further underscore substantial security gaps that could compromise sensitive financial information.
The platform's strongest elements are Breach History (100/100) and Vulnerability Management (85/100), suggesting proactive incident tracking. However, Data Protection at 60/100 and Incident Response at 60/100 remain inconsistent. Financial teams considering Abacus should conduct thorough security reviews, implementing additional safeguards to mitigate identified risks.
For comprehensive security insights, review the Security Dimensions section for a detailed breakdown of each evaluated security parameter.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Abacus.ai demonstrates limited authentication security with an overall security score of 36/100, placing it in the D+ grade range. The platform's Identity & Access Management dimension scores only 25/100, signaling substantial vulnerabilities in login security. While precise multi-factor authentication (MFA) details are unavailable, the low score suggests minimal advanced authentication protections.
Security dimension analysis reveals consistent "needs improvement" ratings across critical areas like API security (30/100), infrastructure security (20/100), and compliance frameworks. The sole bright spots are vulnerability management (85/100) and a clean breach history (100/100), indicating no known historical security incidents.
Enterprise security teams should exercise significant caution when evaluating Abacus.ai's authentication mechanisms. For comprehensive authentication details, we recommend directly contacting Abacus support or requesting their official security documentation. See the Security Dimensions section for a full breakdown of our assessment.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Abacus.ai demonstrates moderate security infrastructure with an overall security score of 36/100, earning a D+ grade. The platform exhibits significant challenges across multiple security dimensions, particularly in infrastructure and access management. Identity and Access Management scores just 25/100, indicating substantial room for improvement in user authentication and permission controls. Infrastructure Security receives a low 20/100, suggesting potential vulnerabilities in system architecture and network protection.
Positively, the platform shows strong Vulnerability Management (85/100) and maintains a clean Breach History (100/100), which provides some reassurance for security-conscious organizations. Compliance and Certification scores 55/100, reflecting partial adherence to standard security protocols. Data Protection achieves a moderate 60/100, indicating basic but not comprehensive data safeguarding mechanisms.
Security decision-makers should conduct thorough due diligence and potentially request additional security documentation before full platform integration. See Security Dimensions section for detailed breakdown.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
With a security score of 36/100 and a D+ grade, Abacus presents significant enterprise security risks that demand careful evaluation before adoption. The platform lacks critical compliance certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS – essential benchmarks for enterprise-grade security. These compliance gaps expose organizations to potential data protection vulnerabilities and regulatory non-compliance challenges.
Security decision-makers should conduct a comprehensive risk assessment before considering Abacus for sensitive workflows. The low overall security score suggests potential weaknesses in data protection, access controls, and security infrastructure. Recommended next steps include requesting a detailed security audit directly from Abacus, reviewing their most recent third-party security assessments, and performing a thorough vendor risk management evaluation.
For a complete security breakdown, reference the Security Dimensions section on Abacus's detailed assessment page.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Abacus 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
48/100🏆 | C+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
AbacusCurrent | 36/100 | D+ | N/A | |
31/100 | D | N/A | View ProfileView | |
29/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
24/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | 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.