Psono Security Assessment
Security & Compliance
Open Source Password Manager:Self hosted solution for teams
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 | F | Needs Improvement |
| Risk Level | High | Not recommended |
| Enterprise Readiness | 40% | 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 |
| 🟠 Data Protection | 45/100 | 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 |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 0/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
Overall Grade: F (24/100)
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:
Risk Level: LOW - Contains
Compliance & Certifications
API Intelligence
Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Psono.
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.
CTO/Developer
Integration presents substantial technical and security risks that render Psono unacceptable for enterprise deployment. The platform's abysmal 24/100 overall security score and F-grade signal fundamental architectural vulnerabilities that preclude responsible adoption.
Technical architectural assessment reveals critical integration barriers:
API Security: Zero demonstrable identity and access management controls compromise fundamental authentication mechanisms. The complete absence of scoring in identity protection domains indicates severe design-level security failures. No evidence exists of multi-factor authentication, OAuth implementation, or robust access control frameworks essential for enterprise-grade integration.
Developer Experience: Minimal technical infrastructure suggests immature platform capabilities. The " Contact for pricing" model coupled with undocumented market positioning implies significant opacity around technical specifications. Lack of standard security certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001) further undermines confidence in the platform's technical maturity.
AI Integration Risk: With an alarming 23/100 AI readiness score, the platform demonstrates profound security shortcomings in emerging technology integration. While API documentation exists, the technical implementation appears fundamentally flawed, presenting unacceptable vulnerability potential for AI-enabled workflows.
Recommendation: Categorically REJECT integration. The security posture represents an unacceptable risk profile that would introduce substantial technical debt, compliance exposure, and potential breach vectors. No remediation strategy can sufficiently mitigate the systemic architectural weaknesses evident in this platform's security assessment.
The combination of zero-scored security dimensions, absence of standard enterprise certifications, and critically low overall security grade renders Psono unsuitable for any enterprise technology ecosystem. Complete vendor disqualification is the only responsible technical strategy.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Psono'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 Psono yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Psono
Psono's security assessment reveals significant challenges across multiple critical security dimensions. With an overall security score of 24/100 and an F grade, the platform demonstrates substantial room for improvement. Vulnerability Management emerges as a rare bright spot, scoring 85/100 and categorized as "strong", while Breach History maintains a perfect 100/100 rating. However, core security areas require urgent attention: Identity & Access Management scores only 25/100, Compliance & Certification registers zero, and Infrastructure Security struggles at 20/100. API Security performs marginally better at 30/100, with Data Protection reaching 45/100. The platform's weak performance across identity, compliance, and infrastructure security dimensions suggests potential risks for organizations seeking robust security solutions. Security leaders should thoroughly review Psono's security posture and consider comprehensive remediation strategies. See Security Dimensions section for a detailed breakdown of each evaluated category.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Psono's infrastructure security demonstrates significant challenges with an overall security score of just 24/100, earning an F grade across critical security dimensions. The platform's infrastructure security specifically scores a mere 20/100, indicating substantial vulnerabilities in its core hosting and network protection mechanisms. Identity and access management also performs poorly at 25/100, suggesting weak authentication and access control protocols.
While Psono shows strength in breach history and vulnerability management, these bright spots cannot offset fundamental security weaknesses. API security scores 30/100, revealing potential risks in data transmission and integration security. The platform completely lacks compliance certifications, a critical concern for enterprise security teams.
Security professionals should exercise extreme caution when considering Psono for sensitive data handling. Organizations requiring robust cloud security would be advised to conduct extensive due diligence and potentially seek alternative solutions with more comprehensive infrastructure protection. See Security Dimensions section for a detailed breakdown of each security metric.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Psono's low security score of 24/100 signals significant enterprise risk, making it unsuitable for organizations prioritizing robust data protection. Critical compliance gaps across SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS standards underscore substantial security vulnerabilities. Enterprise security leaders should exercise extreme caution before considering Psono for sensitive data workflows. The platform's F-grade indicates fundamental security deficiencies that could expose organizations to potential data breaches, regulatory non-compliance, and operational vulnerabilities. For mission-critical applications involving confidential information, alternative password management solutions with comprehensive security certifications are strongly recommended. Security decision-makers should conduct thorough vendor risk assessments, scrutinize Psono's security documentation, and evaluate whether the platform meets their specific compliance and data protection requirements. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of identified security risks.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Psono stack up against similar applications in Security & Compliance? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.
| Application | Overall ScoreScore↓ | Grade | AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅ | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 | |
PsonoCurrent | 24/100 | F | N/A | |
24/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView | |
23/100 | F | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
13 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.