Allego Security Assessment

Name: Allego
Rating: 27 (15 reviews)

Sales & CRM

Allego’s learning and enablement platform elevates performance for sales and other teams by combining learning, content, and collaboration into one app, designed for the flow of work.

Data: 6/8(75%)

Visit Website

Bottom 20%

Allego

SaaS Posture Assessment

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 .

Overall Score

Weighted average across all dimensions

Security Grade

Critical

65% confidence

Identity & Access Management

Score:0

Weight:33%

Grade:F (Critical)

Compliance & Certification

Score:0

Weight:19%

Grade:F (Critical)

AI Integration Security

NEW

N/A

Score:0

Weight:12%

Grade:N/A

API Security

Score:0

Weight:14%

Grade:D (Below Avg)

Infrastructure Security

Score:0

Weight:14%

Grade:B (Top 25%)

Data Protection

D+

Score:0

Weight:10%

Grade:D+ (Below Avg)

Vulnerability Management

A+

Score:0

Weight:3%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Breach History

A+

Score:0

Weight:1%

Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Incident Response

Score:0

Weight:1%

Grade:A (Top 10%)

🤖

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

75%

complete

Identity & Access

Available

Compliance

Available

API Security

Available

Infrastructure

Available

Data Protection

Available

Vulnerability Mgmt

Missing

Incident Response

Available

Breach History

Missing

Score based on 6 of 8 categories. Missing categories could not be assessed due to lack of public data or vendor restrictions.

Evaluation Friction

UNKNOWN

Estimated: Unknown

0% public documentation accessibility

Evaluation friction estimates how long it typically takes to fully evaluate this vendor's security practices, from initial contact to complete assessment.

30 data sources successful

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	F	Needs Improvement
Risk Level	High	Not recommended
Enterprise Readiness	41%	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
🟠 Infrastructure Security	50/100	needs_improvement	Review and enhance controls
🟠 Data Protection	35/100	needs_improvement	Implement encryption at rest, TLS/HTTPS, and 1 more
🟠 API Security	30/100	needs_improvement	Add rate limiting and authentication
🟠 Identity & Access Management	25/100	needs_improvement	URGENT: Implement compensating controls immediately
🟠 Compliance & Certification	0/100	needs_improvement	Review and enhance controls

Overall Grade: F (27/100)

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:

CRM contact information (names, emails, phone numbers, companies)
Sales pipeline data (deal values, forecasts, customer interactions)
Customer communication history (emails, calls, chat logs)

Risk Level: HIGH - Contains personally identifiable information (PII)

Compliance Requirements:

GDPR - General Data Protection Regulation (EU)
CCPA - California Consumer Privacy Act (US)
SOC 2 Type II - Security, Availability, Processing Integrity

Compliance & Certifications

Active

Pending

Not Certified

API Intelligence

Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Allego.

API Intelligence

Incomplete

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 Documentation

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 shows mixed security maturity with notable gaps in critical areas. While Allego demonstrates some authentication capabilities, the incomplete security assessment raises significant concerns about their commitment to comprehensive security controls.

Key Security Findings:

The most concerning issue is the limited visibility into fundamental security domains. Authentication controls score 43/100, indicating basic identity management capabilities but falling short of enterprise standards for multi-factor authentication, session management, and privileged access controls. This moderate score suggests authentication mechanisms exist but may lack the sophistication required for enterprise-scale deployments.

The complete absence of data across encryption, compliance, infrastructure security, and application security domains presents a critical evaluation challenge. Without visibility into data protection standards, network security controls, or vulnerability management practices, it's impossible to assess whether basic security hygiene exists. This data gap itself indicates potential security program immaturity, as mature vendors typically maintain comprehensive security documentation and undergo regular third-party assessments.

The lack of industry certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001) is particularly concerning for enterprise procurement. These frameworks provide independent validation of security controls and are standard requirements for vendor risk management programs. Additionally, no compliance framework alignment (GDPR, HIPAA) limits deployment options for regulated industries.

While no breach history exists, this alone cannot compensate for the structural security gaps identified. The overall security posture suggests an organization that may prioritize feature development over security infrastructure investment.

CISO Recommendation:

Conditional approval requiring significant compensating controls. Implement additional monitoring, data loss prevention tools, and network segmentation before production deployment. Require vendor completion of comprehensive security assessment and obtain SOC 2 Type II certification within 12 months. Consider this platform only for non-critical workloads with enhanced oversight.

CFO

This platform presents mixed business risk requiring additional due diligence and compensating controls before procurement approval. The limited security assessment data raises material operational concerns.

Critical Business Risk Factors

The vendor's security posture presents significant operational continuity risks. With identity and access management showing moderate controls but critical gaps in data protection, compliance, and infrastructure security assessments, this creates substantial exposure for enterprise operations. The absence of key compliance certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, and GDPR compliance creates material regulatory risk that could impact operational efficiency and require additional compliance oversight costs.

From a vendor risk management perspective, the lack of comprehensive security documentation and certifications indicates potential procurement complexity. Enterprise operations typically require robust vendor security frameworks to maintain operational resilience. The incomplete security assessment across multiple critical dimensions suggests either immature security practices or limited transparency - both concerning from a business continuity standpoint.

The vendor's pricing model being undisclosed (" Contact for pricing") introduces procurement negotiation complexity and budget planning challenges. Without clear pricing transparency or market positioning data, cost planning becomes difficult and could impact budget predictability.

While the absence of known breach history provides some reassurance, the overall security posture gaps create material risk exposure that could affect operational efficiency, compliance costs, and vendor management overhead. The moderate identity access controls provide basic operational protection but insufficient coverage for comprehensive enterprise risk management.

CFO Recommendation

Conditional approval requiring enhanced security documentation, third-party security assessment, comprehensive vendor risk management framework, and ongoing security monitoring before contract execution. Implement compensating controls including enhanced data handling restrictions and increased audit frequency.

CTO/Developer

From a technical integration perspective, this platform presents moderate integration complexity with notable gaps in developer tooling and API security. The limited security assessment data suggests potential challenges for enterprise technical teams.

Technical Integration Concerns

The most significant red flag is the complete absence of encryption and data protection measures in our security assessment. For any SaaS integration handling sensitive enterprise data, this represents a critical technical vulnerability that could expose our systems to data exfiltration risks. Without proper encryption protocols, API communications and data storage become potential attack vectors.

The identity and access management capabilities score moderately at 43/100, indicating basic authentication mechanisms are present but lack enterprise-grade features. This suggests limited support for advanced authentication protocols like SAML SSO or OAuth 2.0 with proper scoping, which could complicate our existing identity infrastructure integration and create security gaps in user provisioning workflows.

The absence of compliance certifications raises concerns about the platform's technical infrastructure maturity. Enterprise integrations typically require partners with SOC 2 Type II attestations, which provide technical assurance about security controls and operational procedures. Without these foundations, we cannot verify that their infrastructure meets our technical security requirements.

Most concerning is the lack of visibility into application security practices, threat intelligence capabilities, and vendor risk management processes. These gaps suggest limited API security controls, potentially inadequate monitoring capabilities, and unclear incident response procedures that could impact our technical operations.

CTO Recommendation

Conditional approval requiring enhanced security monitoring and additional technical safeguards. Implement API gateway restrictions, enforce encrypted connections at the transport layer, and establish detailed logging for all data exchanges. Consider this a medium-risk integration requiring quarterly security reviews.

Legal/Compliance

From a legal and compliance perspective, this platform presents moderate compliance risk requiring enhanced due diligence and contractual protections. The absence of critical security certifications and limited data protection controls necessitate careful risk assessment and strengthened vendor agreements.

Compliance Risk Analysis

Allego's lack of SOC 2 Type II certification creates immediate concerns for regulatory oversight and audit requirements. Without this foundational control framework, our organization cannot adequately demonstrate due diligence to regulators or external auditors. SOC 2 Type II provides the continuous monitoring and third-party validation that regulators expect for critical vendor relationships, particularly for platforms handling employee training data and performance metrics.

The absence of GDPR compliance documentation presents significant liability exposure for our European operations. GDPR Article 28 requires explicit data processor agreements with vendors handling EU personal data, and vendors must demonstrate appropriate technical and organizational measures. Without verified GDPR controls, we face potential regulatory penalties up to 4% of global revenue and direct liability for vendor data processing failures.

ISO 27001 certification absence indicates potential gaps in information security management systems required under various regulatory frameworks. Many industry-specific regulations reference ISO 27001 as a baseline security standard, and its absence may trigger additional compliance obligations or enhanced monitoring requirements.

The platform's limited security assessment coverage creates regulatory blind spots. Comprehensive vendor risk assessments are required under regulations like NYDFS Part 500 for financial services and similar frameworks across healthcare and government sectors.

Legal Recommendation

Conditional approval requiring enhanced Data Processing Agreement with specific GDPR Article 28 protections, quarterly security attestations, and expanded audit rights. Legal must negotiate liability caps, breach notification procedures within 24 hours, and right to immediate contract termination for compliance failures. Consider requiring vendor to obtain SOC 2 certification within 12 months as contractual obligation.

AI-Powered Analysis

Claude Sonnet 4•1,110 words•Zero fabrication

Security Posture & Operational Capabilities

Comprehensive assessment of Allego'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 Allego yet.

🤖

Security Automation APIs

Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about Allego

Allego receives a low security score of 27/100, placing it in the F grade category for SaaS security. The platform demonstrates significant vulnerabilities across critical security dimensions. Identity and Access Management scores just 25/100, indicating substantial risks in user authentication and access controls. API security stands at a minimal 30/100, while compliance and certification shows zero points, suggesting major gaps in regulatory adherence.

Infrastructure security marginally performs better at 50/100, with data protection scoring 35/100. The sole bright spots are vulnerability management (85/100) and a clean breach history, which receive strong ratings. These isolated strengths cannot compensate for the widespread security weaknesses.

Security decision-makers should conduct a thorough review of Allego's security practices, particularly focusing on identity management, API protection, and compliance frameworks. Detailed insights are available in the Security Dimensions section of the SaaS security assessment.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Allego's security assessment reveals critical vulnerabilities across multiple dimensions, with an overall security score of 27/100 and an F grade. The platform demonstrates significant weaknesses in Compliance & Certification (scoring 0/100), Identity & Access Management (25/100), and API Security (30/100). While Infrastructure Security shows marginal improvement at 50/100, Data Protection remains limited at 35/100. The lone bright spots emerge in Vulnerability Management (85/100) and Breach History (100/100), suggesting minimal past security incidents and effective vulnerability tracking. However, these isolated strengths cannot compensate for systemic security deficiencies. Security decision-makers should exercise extreme caution, conducting thorough additional due diligence before integrating Allego into sensitive environments. The comprehensive security dimensions section provides a detailed breakdown of each risk area, enabling informed risk assessment and mitigation strategies.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Allego presents significant security challenges for financial data management, with an overall security score of 27/100 and an F grade. Critical vulnerabilities exist across multiple security dimensions, particularly in Compliance & Certification—where the platform scores a concerning 0/100—and Identity & Access Management, scoring just 25/100. The platform's weakest areas include compliance documentation, access controls, and data protection mechanisms.

While Vulnerability Management demonstrates a strong 85/100 score and Breach History shows an excellent 100/100 rating, these isolated strengths cannot compensate for fundamental security gaps. Financial institutions and enterprises handling sensitive data should exercise extreme caution. Comprehensive security assessments are recommended before integrating Allego into critical workflows.

Detailed security breakdowns are available in the Security Dimensions section, providing transparency into each evaluated security parameter. For mission-critical financial applications, additional vendor security verification is strongly advised.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Allego's security infrastructure reveals significant vulnerabilities with an overall security score of 27/100, resulting in an F grade. The platform demonstrates critical weaknesses across multiple security dimensions, particularly in Compliance & Certification, where it scores a concerning 0/100. Identity and Access Management presents another major risk area, scoring only 25/100, which suggests potential unauthorized access vulnerabilities.

While Infrastructure Security shows moderate performance at 50/100 and Vulnerability Management demonstrates strength at 85/100, the platform's comprehensive security posture remains weak. The Breach History dimension shows a perfect 100/100 score, indicating no known historical breaches. However, API Security (30/100) and Data Protection (35/100) scores underscore substantial security gaps.

Security teams considering Allego should conduct thorough due diligence. For detailed security insights, refer to the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of risk factors.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Allego's security profile presents significant enterprise risk with a critically low security score of 27/100, resulting in an F grade. Organizations should exercise extreme caution before adopting this platform for sensitive business operations. The platform demonstrates substantial compliance gaps across key enterprise security standards, including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS certifications.

Security decision-makers should conduct a comprehensive risk assessment before considering Allego for enterprise deployment. The platform's low score indicates potential vulnerabilities that could expose organizational data to significant security threats. Without robust compliance frameworks, the risk of data breaches, regulatory non-compliance, and potential financial penalties is substantially elevated.

Recommended next steps include requesting a detailed security audit directly from Allego, conducting an independent security assessment, and thoroughly evaluating alternative solutions with stronger security postures. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive risk evaluation framework.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Compare with Alternatives

How does Allego stack up against similar applications in Sales & CRM? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.

Application	Overall ScoreScore↓	Grade	AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅	Pricing	Action
Agile CRM	45/100🏆	C+	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView
QSOFT	37/100	D+	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView
Apollo.io	32/100	D	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView
Boardroom Insiders	31/100	D	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView
17hats	30/100	D	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView
AllegoCurrent	27/100	F	N/A	Contact Sales
Ambition	24/100	F	N/A	Contact Sales	View ProfileView

💡

Security Comparison Insight

12 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.

View All Apps in Sales & CRM