BitSight Security Ratings vs. OneTrust GRC & Security Assurance Cloud

If you are considering BitSight Security Ratings as a portion or bulk of a larger vendor management project you will be well served in letting the risk scores be an indication of how closely you need to examine a vendor. However, you should not base your assessment solely on the risk score provided. The risk score is based on publicly available data and can be inaccurate.

Incentivized

OneTrust provides a repeatable and defined process for vendor assessments but should be adapted to your organization. OneTrust functions well for a centralized document repository. The pricing of modules and what modules are required for workflows to function fully should be better defined. Automated assessments can wind up in spam filters and should be communicated outside of the platform prior to sending to the vendor.

Incentivized

• Security hygiene tracking over time
• Understandable risk score based on observations
• Predictability model of potential cyber security issues based on security habits.

Incentivized

• Module wise implementation.
• Very reasonable price structure.
• Easy and speedy to implement.
• Product roadmap.

• Since data is based on public registration IP and domain data can be stale depending on ISP/Domain registration update delays.
• Correcting a false detection is a month-long endeavor and requires the company with the impacted score to clean up BitSight's data.
• Customer service for incorrect data is convoluted and requires a deep understanding of domain registration to correct the data. The responsibility for correcting data is placed solely on the customer's shoulders.

Incentivized

• Documentation chasing for assessments is not as automated or hands-off as demos made it seem.
• Getting custom risk matrix set up required professional onboarding.
• Platform is less than intuitive.
• Pricing is module dependent and demos do not highlight which module is included in which workflow.

Incentivized

BitSight Security Ratings ranks evenly with SecurityScorecard and both below OneTrust for our use case. We needed a platform that would let us define risk for our organization and weight scores differently based on data sensitivity. BitSight and SecurityScorecard are aggregate data that can provide insight into the security habits of a potential vendor and should be considered as an addition to most vendor management projects. However, they both provide metrics based on hygiene and not on data-defined risk. In concert with a platform to evaluate risk based on data and to inform the overall evaluation of a vendor, BitSight Security Ratings can be made to shine. Just understand that you may have to validate some data.

Incentivized

During the assessment, we found that OneTrust is easier to use, set up, and administer. it has a quick ROI and value for business. The OneTrust product support and roadmap are far more competitive in comparison to TrustArc. OneTrust is specialized in GRC including Data Privacy and Cookie compliance, where Archer is good in Enterprise Risk management.

• Wasted resource hours cleaning up data to correct erroneous risk score.
• Extra time spent addressing calls from clients about erroneous risk score data.
• Extra time validating risk score provided by BitSight Security Ratings for potential vendors to ensure valid data.

Incentivized

• More uniform vendor assessments.
• Defensible numeric metrics reflecting risk.
• Centralized document repository for audit proofs.

Incentivized