Zabbix Security Assessment
IT & Infrastructure
enterprise open source monitoring solution for networks and applications
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
4/8 security categories assessed
Score based on 4 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 |
| 🟠 Identity & Access Management | 45/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 API Security | 30/100 | needs_improvement | Add rate limiting and authentication |
| 🟠 Infrastructure Security | 30/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Data Protection | 20/100 | needs_improvement | Implement encryption at rest, TLS/HTTPS, and 1 more |
| 🟠 Compliance & Certification | 0/100 | needs_improvement | Review and enhance controls |
| 🟠 Incident Response | 0/100 | needs_improvement | Document incident response plan |
Overall Grade: D (32/100)
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 Zabbix.
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
Executive Security Assessment: Zabbix
Zabbix demonstrates strong foundational security practices with robust identity and access management controls scoring 95/100, positioning this monitoring platform as an acceptable enterprise risk for deployment with standard security oversight.
Critical Security Findings
The platform's most significant strength lies in its exceptional identity and access management capabilities, achieving a 95/100 score that indicates mature authentication controls, proper access governance, and enterprise-grade user management features. This strong foundation is essential for a monitoring platform that requires privileged access to infrastructure components across the enterprise environment.
However, comprehensive security assessment is severely limited by incomplete data coverage across seven of eight critical security dimensions. The absence of encryption and data protection scoring raises immediate concerns about data-in-transit and data-at-rest protections for sensitive monitoring telemetry. Compliance and data privacy capabilities remain unverified, creating potential regulatory exposure for enterprises subject to SOC 2, ISO 27001, or GDPR requirements.
The platform lacks documented security certifications and formal compliance attestations, which may complicate vendor risk assessments and regulatory audit processes. While no breach history is documented, the incomplete security posture visibility prevents thorough risk quantification. For a monitoring solution that typically processes sensitive infrastructure data and performance metrics, these data gaps represent meaningful assessment limitations.
CISO Recommendation
Deploy with enhanced due diligence protocols and compensating controls. Require vendor completion of security questionnaires covering encryption standards, compliance certifications, and incident response procedures before production implementation. Implement network segmentation and data classification controls to limit monitoring platform access to necessary infrastructure components only.
Security Posture & Operational Capabilities
Comprehensive assessment of Zabbix'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 Zabbix yet.
Security Automation APIs
Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Zabbix
Zabbix has a security score of 32/100, indicating significant room for improvement across multiple security dimensions. The platform's security posture reveals critical gaps, with most dimensions scoring below 50. Vulnerability management and breach history represent the only strong points, achieving scores of 85 and 100 respectively. However, these high-performing areas are minimal in overall weight and cannot compensate for substantial weaknesses.
Key security challenges include zero scores in compliance certification and incident response, with low marks in API security (30/100), infrastructure security (30/100), and data protection (20/100). Identity and access management performs slightly better at 45/100, but remains in the "needs improvement" category.
Security professionals evaluating Zabbix should carefully review these dimensional scores and consider additional security controls or alternative solutions. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of these assessments.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Zabbix presents significant security challenges with an overall security score of 32/100, earning a D grade across most critical security dimensions. The platform demonstrates minimal security capabilities, with particularly weak performance in Compliance & Certification, Incident Response, and Data Protection—scoring 0 in these crucial areas. Identity & Access Management marginally performs at 45/100, indicating substantial room for improvement.
The platform's sole bright spot is Vulnerability Management, scoring an impressive 85 and maintaining a perfect 100/100 Breach History record. However, these isolated strengths cannot compensate for widespread security deficiencies in API Security (30/100) and Infrastructure Security (30/100).
Security professionals should approach Zabbix with significant caution, implementing extensive additional security controls and carefully evaluating whether the platform meets their organizational security requirements. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of each security category.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Zabbix has a security score of 32/100, earning a D grade, which indicates significant security limitations for handling financial data. The platform shows critical weaknesses across multiple security dimensions, particularly in Compliance & Certification and Incident Response, both scoring 0/100. API Security and Infrastructure Security also score low at 30/100, raising substantial concerns for financial applications.
The only strong points are Vulnerability Management (85/100) and Breach History (100/100), suggesting proactive tracking of potential security issues. However, the low scores in Identity & Access Management (45/100) and Data Protection (20/100) represent serious risks for financial information management.
Security professionals handling sensitive financial data should carefully evaluate Zabbix's security posture. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of each security category and potential mitigation strategies.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Zabbix demonstrates significant security infrastructure challenges with an overall security score of 32/100, placing it in the "D" grade category. The platform's infrastructure security dimension scores just 30/100, indicating substantial areas requiring enhancement. While Zabbix exhibits strong performance in breach history (scoring 100/100), critical security domains like compliance, API security, and data protection score poorly, ranging between 0-30/100.
Identity and access management presents moderate concerns, scoring 45/100, suggesting potential authentication vulnerabilities. The platform's vulnerability management stands out as a relative strength at 85/100, providing some reassurance for security-conscious organizations. However, the complete absence of compliance certifications and minimal incident response capabilities underscore significant security gaps.
Security decision-makers should carefully evaluate Zabbix's infrastructure security posture and consider implementing additional protective measures. See Security Dimensions section for comprehensive security assessment details.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Zabbix presents significant security risks that make enterprise-wide approval challenging. With a low security score of 32/100 and a "D" grade, the platform demonstrates substantial compliance and security vulnerabilities. Critical enterprise compliance certifications including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS are absent, which raises serious concerns for organizations with stringent security requirements. Security decision-makers should conduct a comprehensive risk assessment before considering Zabbix for sensitive business operations. The platform's low security posture suggests potential data protection and regulatory compliance challenges that could expose the organization to significant operational and legal risks. See the Security Dimensions section for a detailed breakdown of Zabbix's security assessment. For mission-critical infrastructure monitoring, enterprises may want to evaluate alternative solutions with more robust security credentials and comprehensive compliance frameworks.
Source: Search insights from Google, Bing
Compare with Alternatives
How does Zabbix stack up against similar applications in IT & Infrastructure? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.
| Application | Overall ScoreScore↓ | Grade | AI Security 🤖AI 🤖⇅ | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
52/100🏆 | B | N/A | View ProfileView | |
44/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
41/100 | C | N/A | View ProfileView | |
37/100 | D+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
36/100 | D+ | N/A | View ProfileView | |
ZabbixCurrent | 32/100 | D | N/A | |
31/100 | D | N/A | View ProfileView |
Security Comparison Insight
15 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.