DataGuard ISMS vs SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

DataGuard ISMS

The asset register with owners, tagging, bulk import and asset-to-risk linking, plus a risk distribution matrix, pre-built risk and measure libraries and mitigation tracking with assigned tasks, is a working asset-and-risk core. Incident handling appears only as configurable workflows and a security-incidents module, and we found no public information on statutory reporting clocks (NIS2 24h/72h), a documented risk methodology, or inheritance of protection needs across the visualized asset dependencies.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

The ISMS product page presents SECJUR's own certifications, not the customer's ISMS: no asset inventory, risk methodology, treatment tracking, protection-needs inheritance, or incident workflows with NIS2 24h/72h clocks appear anywhere in the evidence. The deepest operational capability evidenced is task management and a policy generator — ticket-system level, not a risk backbone; NIS2/DORA exist only as framework content claims.

DataGuard ISMS

Measures live in a central place with owner and status tracking, effectiveness assessment, task linking, automatic evidence assignment and reuse of the same measure across frameworks — more than a status-field checklist. The SoA material we saw is guidance about what the standard demands rather than a product feature, and we found no public information on SoA generation from live control status, delegation and escalation, or internal-audit workflows with findings management.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

Control cross-mapping across frameworks is evidenced and tasks carry status and team ownership, so this is more than a static checklist. But nothing evidences SoA generation from live status, internal-audit or findings workflows, or controls carrying their own evidence — the exact tests I apply, all silent.

DataGuard ISMS

The major regimes for its market are present — DSGVO, ISO 27001:2022, TISAX, NIS2 and EU AI Act — with one-measure-many-frameworks linking, asset management mapped to ISO 27001, NIS2 and TISAX measures, a preconfigured NIS2 framework and a published NIS2-to-ISO 27001 mapping. We found no public information on DORA, BSI IT-Grundschutz or SOC 2, and the measures page states further frameworks are coming soon, so coverage beyond ISO 27001 reads as content packs rather than broad current coverage.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

The German-market regimes are all present and visibly maintained: ISO 27001, TISAX, NIS2 (launched Q2 2023, early), DORA, plus EU AI Act and ISO 9001 in 2025, with cross-mapping on one data basis. Held below 8: no BSI IT-Grundschutz, SOC 2 appears only as SECJUR's own certificate rather than a supported framework, and '10+' is a marketing count with no documented update cadence.

DataGuard ISMS

Automated custom reports, real-time dashboards for gaps and planned activities, automatic capture and storage of compliance documentation, per-requirement evidence assignment and a case study citing 140+ evidence artifacts for a TISAX audit give standard report generators and evidence per control. We found no public information on revision-safe change history in the platform, audit-scoped evidence packs on demand, auditor access roles, or reconstructing the state on a past date; the versioning text we saw describes the standard's demands on documents rather than a platform feature.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

The 100% audit success rate is an outcome testimonial, not evidence of revision-safe change history, audit-scoped evidence packs, auditor access roles, or a date-X answer — none of those appear anywhere in the evidence. A policy generator produces documents, not defensible proof; as evidenced here, the audit file is assembled before the audit, which is precisely what I reject.

DataGuard ISMS

Native connectors are evidenced for Jira and Asana (setup in under 15 minutes), automated Azure asset updates and CRM consent data with continuous real-time synchronisation, alongside an APIs entry, AI-assisted automation and real-time vulnerability detection on assets. We found no public information on directory import (AD/Entra), CMDB, ServiceNow-class ticketing, webhooks, SSO/SCIM, or automated evidence tests with human review.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

JIRA is named and 'über 60 API-Anbindungen' is claimed, which clears CSV-import level, but the evidence names no directory import, CMDB, scanner or SSO/SCIM connector and shows no REST API documentation. The only automation evidenced is automated e-mail notifications and task tracking — reminders, not automated evidence collection.

DataGuard ISMS

The vendor is a German GmbH with a Munich imprint, commercial register entry and a named DPO contact, but we found no public information on where the platform hosting the risk register resides, on subprocessors, or on a published DPA and TOMs. The privacy policy discloses standard contractual clauses for recipients outside the EU/EEA, and the company runs a London office after acquiring a UK consent business, so non-European jurisdictional reach is plausible while remaining undocumented in the captured pages.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

The imprint confirms a German GmbH under the Hamburg registry, hosting is claimed in Germany, and the investors on record are European (Berlin, Lisbon) — no US reach surfaces. But 'Hosted in Germany' names no data centers, and the evidence contains no published subprocessor list, DPA or TOMs, so the chain around the customer's risk register is only half-documented.

DataGuard ISMS

All three plans — Base, Pro and Enterprise — end in 'Angebot anfordern' (request a quote), and we found no public price figures, billing periods or module prices anywhere. The only public numbers are relative claims such as up to 50 percent cheaper than external consultants, plus a 'no hidden costs' slogan on a demo form, none of which let a buyer compute a real invoice.

SECJUR Digital Compliance Office (ISMS)

No price appears anywhere: only relative claims ('50% günstiger', 'bis zu 67% günstiger') and an unquantified 'Festpreis' with consulting bundled in. The real invoice is a sales conversation; the disclosed fixed-price, all-inclusive model shape is the only thing keeping this off absolute zero.