Descope Security Assessment
Security & Compliance
Descope helps every developer build secure, frictionless authentication and user journeys for any application. Our no-code workflow builder, SDKs, and APIs empower developers to easily create and customize passwordless authentication flows for every user interaction. Designed by security experts, Descope also stops bot attacks on login pages, prevents account takeover, and enables apps to easily add MFA and step-up flows. Our customers launch their apps faster and safer than before, improve user onboarding and conversion, and “descope” authentication as a sprint line item to free up engineering resources. Founded in 2022, Descope is headquartered in Los Altos, CA and is a member of the FIDO Alliance.
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
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
Comprehensive Security Analysis
In-depth assessment with detailed recommendations
Security Analysis
Executive Summary
| Metric | Value | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Security Grade | C | Needs Improvement |
| Risk Level | High | Not recommended |
| Enterprise Readiness | 47% | 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 | 70/100 | good | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 60/100 | needs_improvement | Monitor and improve gradually |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 50/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 40/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 35/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 API Security | 30/100 | needs_improvement | Add rate limiting and authentication |
Overall Grade: C (42/100)
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 | ✅ Published | Formal SLA available |
| API Versioning | ✅ Yes | Breaking changes managed |
| Support Channels | ℹ️ 0 channels |
Operational Facts Extracted: 4 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:
Risk Level: LOW - Contains
🛡️ Enterprise Security Controls to Implement
Even with strong vendor security, enterprises must implement:
1. Identity & Access Management
- Enable SSO with your identity provider
- Implement MFA for all user accounts
- Regular access reviews (quarterly recommended)
Compliance & Certifications
API Intelligence
Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Descope.
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
Descope presents mixed security maturity with notable technical gaps that require strategic remediation. Our enterprise security assessment reveals a C-grade security posture (42/100) indicating substantial risk exposure across multiple critical domains.
The most significant concerns stem from a complete absence of foundational security certifications. With zero documentation of SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, or HIPAA compliance, Descope fails to demonstrate adherence to established security standards. This absence signals potential systemic weaknesses in regulatory governance and controlled security practices.
Our technical risk analysis identifies critical vulnerabilities:
- Zero documented identity and access management controls suggest potential authentication risks
- Complete lack of encryption and data protection scoring indicates potential data handling vulnerabilities
- Absence of vendor breach intelligence tracking represents a significant blind spot in security monitoring
- No measurable infrastructure or network security controls raise substantial operational risk concerns
The AI integration security dimension provides a marginally promising counterpoint, with an AI readiness score of 56 (B+ grade). This suggests some emerging capabilities in modern security architecture, though far from comprehensive enterprise-grade protection.
CISO Recommendation: Conditional approval with extensive compensating controls. Before deployment, mandate:
- Comprehensive third-party security audit
- Detailed compliance documentation submission
- Implementation of multi-factor authentication
- Explicit data protection and encryption evidence
- Transparent breach notification protocols
Descope requires significant security infrastructure enhancement before qualifying as an acceptable enterprise vendor. Immediate, substantive security improvements are non-negotiable for potential engagement.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Descope'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 Descope yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Descope
Descope's security assessment reveals a mixed security profile with an overall grade of C and a score of 42/100. The platform demonstrates notable strengths in vulnerability management and breach history, scoring 85 and 100 respectively, indicating robust historical security performance. However, critical security dimensions like Identity & Access Management (40/100) and Compliance & Certification (35/100) require significant improvement. Data Protection emerges as a relative bright spot with a score of 70, suggesting adequate safeguards for sensitive information. Infrastructure Security scores 50, reflecting moderate protective capabilities. The platform's weakest areas include API Security at 30/100, which could pose potential integration risks for security-conscious organizations. Incident response capabilities sit at 60/100, indicating room for enhancement in rapid threat mitigation. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of Descope's security landscape and targeted improvement recommendations.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Descope presents a mixed security profile for financial data management, scoring 42/100 with a C-grade security rating. Financial teams considering the platform should carefully evaluate its security posture. The platform demonstrates strength in vulnerability management (scoring 85/100) and maintains an unblemished breach history. However, critical security dimensions like Identity & Access Management (40/100) and Compliance & Certification (35/100) require substantial improvement.
Data protection emerges as a relative bright spot, achieving an adequate 70/100 score, which provides some reassurance for sensitive financial information handling. Infrastructure security scores 50/100, indicating moderate protective capabilities. Incident response capabilities register at 60/100, suggesting potential gaps in rapid threat mitigation.
Security decision-makers should conduct thorough due diligence. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive security breakdown and consult with Descope directly to understand their ongoing security enhancement strategies.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Descope presents significant security challenges for enterprise adoption with its low 42/100 security score and multiple critical compliance gaps. The platform lacks essential enterprise-grade certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS compliance, which represent substantial risk for sensitive organizational data. Security decision-makers should exercise extreme caution before integrating Descope into their technology ecosystem. While the platform may offer innovative features, the comprehensive compliance and security shortfalls create potential vulnerabilities that could expose the organization to significant operational and regulatory risks. Enterprises prioritizing robust security frameworks should conduct a thorough risk assessment, potentially requiring Descope to demonstrate substantial security improvements before consideration. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of specific compliance limitations and recommended risk mitigation strategies.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Descope stack up against similar applications in Security & Compliance? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.
| Application | Overall ScoreScore↓ | Grade | AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅ | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DescopeCurrent | 42/100🏆 | C | N/A | |
34/100 | D | N/A | View ProfileView | |
28/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
27/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
26/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
24/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
1 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.