whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Data Protection

Dastra

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Dastra SAS · www.dastra.eu

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The IT Integrator

Weighted verdict

Has to feed the compliance platform from the estate that already exists: Entra ID, Jira, the CMDB. Optimizes for directory import, a real API, webhooks and SSO — compliance data that stays current because it syncs, not because someone retypes it. Rejects data islands with a CSV drawbridge.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The IT Integrator

Records & DPIA depth

How this is scored

The DSMS core: records of processing (RoPA/VVT), data protection impact assessments, processor/DPA management and TOMs — how deeply the legal artifacts are modeled and connected.

0 — Document templates in a folder tree; the "register" is a Word file with version numbers in the filename.

3 — A structured RoPA with basic fields and a DPIA questionnaire, but processors, TOMs and legal bases live outside the system.

5 — RoPA and DPIA as linked modules with templates; processor management and TOM assignment exist but are shallow, and group reuse is copy-paste.

8 — A connected data model — processing activities linked to systems, processors, TOMs and legal bases — with DPIA triggers derived from the record, reusable group templates, and outputs a supervisory authority accepts.

10 — Privacy records as a system of record: the RoPA drives DPIAs, processor management and TOM coverage from one data model, multi-client/mandate capability included, and the documentation is audit-ready without manual assembly.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

The Art. 30 record is real, with templates, questionnaires and an AI wizard to draft activities, and actors, security measures and processing exist as linked objects files can attach to. DPIA runs as one of a long questionnaire list alongside contract and DPA analytics with AI, and external DPOs steer multiple clients as one. I found no public information on DPIA triggers derived from the record itself or reusable group templates, so it stops short of the fully connected model. 1 2 6 10

Report an error

Data subject rights & incidents

How this is scored

The operational half of the DSMS: data subject request handling with statutory clocks, breach register and authority notification, deletion concepts that actually delete.

0 — Requests arrive by email and live there; breaches are a phone call and a memo.

3 — A request log and a breach list exist, but deadlines are manual, intake is unstructured, and deletion rules are documentation rather than workflow.

5 — DSR workflows with the Art. 12 clock tracked, structured breach register with the 72-hour clock, deletion concepts assignable to records; automation is reminders.

8 — Intake channels for requests (portal/form), identity-check support, deadline automation with escalation, breach severity assessment and authority-report output, deletion rules tied to the RoPA with execution tracking.

10 — Rights and incidents as operations: end-to-end request handling an authority audit walks through, breach workflows that produce the Art. 33 notification, and deletion automation with evidence that the deletion happened.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

Requests arrive from email, forms and API, a no-code widget handles intake, and a secure portal carries the identification file, with the dashboard tracking overdue, response times and complexity. The breach side documents against the 72-hour duty with an exportable register, per-task configurable deadlines and structured export. I found no public information on deletion rules tied to the record with execution tracking. 8 9

Report an error

Privacy regime coverage

How this is scored

Which privacy regimes the product actually operationalizes — GDPR, BDSG, Swiss nDSG, UK GDPR, ePrivacy, EU AI Act privacy duties — and whether one record maps across them or each regime is a fresh island.

0 — One regime, hard-coded; anything else is "on the roadmap".

3 — GDPR plus one national law as separate checklists; the same processing activity is documented once per regime.

5 — The major regimes for its market with partial cross-mapping; newer duties (AI Act, ePrivacy changes) present as content packs of varying depth.

8 — Broad current coverage with one-record-many-regimes mapping and visible maintenance as regimes evolve.

10 — Regime coverage as a living product: multiple privacy regimes on one data basis, per-country variants, and documented update cadence when the law moves.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

GDPR, UK GDPR, Europrivacy and ISO 27001 appear as framework choices at the Enterprise tier, with SAPIN 2 and multi-compliance questionnaires in the library and a cookie consent module covering the ePrivacy flank. I found no public information on Swiss nDSG or EU AI Act duties, or on a documented update cadence when regimes move. 2 10 11

Report an error

Audit readiness & evidence

How this is scored

Whether the system produces defensible proof: revision-safe history, evidence collection, reports for auditors, authorities and management.

0 — Exports are screenshots; history is overwritten in place.

3 — PDF reports exist but evidence is attached ad hoc and changes leave no reliable trail.

5 — Versioned records, standard report generators for the core registers, evidence attachments per activity; assembling a full audit file still takes days.

8 — Revision-safe change history, audit-scoped evidence packs on demand, management and authority reports current at a click, auditor access roles.

10 — Audit readiness as a standing state: continuous documentation status per regime and scope, exportable proof packs an auditor accepts as-is, and a defensible answer to "show me the state on date X".

Report an error

The IT Integrator

Sixteen audit templates filterable by tag, questionnaire reports that validate, publish, export and archive with risk matrices, plus evidence automation and custom reporting at Enterprise. Audit logs stream to a SIEM in real time, which is the trail I want to pull. I found no public information on revision-safe per-record history, auditor access roles, or a defensible answer to the state on a given date. 2 10 11 12

Report an error

Integrations & automation

How this is scored

Whether the platform feeds from the real IT estate — directory import, ticketing, API — and automates the recurring privacy work instead of re-typing it.

0 — A closed island: manual entry in, PDF out, no API.

3 — CSV/Excel import and export; no live connections, no API worth the name.

5 — Directory import (AD/Entra), a documented REST API for core objects, a handful of native connectors (ticketing or SSO); automation is reminders and recurrence.

8 — Real connector set (ticketing, HR or asset sources), webhooks, SSO/SCIM, workflow automation with delegation and escalation, useful AI assistance with human review.

10 — The platform behaves like infrastructure: API parity for the data model, event streams, bidirectional sync with the estate, and automation that measurably removes the recurring toil (reviews, attestations, evidence pulls) rather than renaming it.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

This is what I want to feed: an OpenAPI 3.x documented REST API, webhooks, SSO with SAML and OpenID plus SCIM, Jira automatically creating and tracking DSRs, ServiceNow and SAP LeanIX assets flowing in, INSEE enriching actors, an email parser for intake and Zapier bridging the rest. I found no public information on escalation workflows or HR sources, and no claim of API parity across the whole data model, so it tops out below the infrastructure class. 1 3 12 13

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the compliance record of the whole company actually lives and under whose law — entity, hosting, subprocessors, DPA. A platform that maps your processing is itself your most concentrated processing.

0 — Non-EU entity, non-EU-default hosting, no public DPA or subprocessor list — for the system holding your RoPA.

3 — A DPA exists and an EU region is available on request or on top tiers; subprocessor exposure to US CLOUD Act reach is broad or undocumented.

5 — EU hosting is the default, DPA and subprocessor list published; the vendor or a critical subprocessor is still within non-European jurisdictional reach.

8 — EU entity, EU hosting with named data centers, published subprocessor list free of content-touching non-EU processors, DPA and TOMs public.

10 — Jurisdictionally clean end to end: European ownership, EU-only hosting and subprocessors, on-premises or sovereign-cloud options, and the whole chain documented publicly.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

French entity, Azure hosting stated in the European Union and particularly France, a published subprocessor list with safeguards, ISO 27001 and 27701, designed and developed in Europe. Microsoft sits under US CLOUD Act reach as the host and the published list includes US processors, so this is EU-default hosting with non-European jurisdictional reach on a critical component. I found no public information on ownership or named data centers. 4 5 8

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real invoice — per module, per entity, per year, with consulting unbundled — from public pages alone. Unpublished pricing is the B2B norm in this market, so this criterion describes rather than condemns; the benches weight it accordingly.

0 — No public prices at all; every configuration is a sales conversation.

3 — An entry price exists, but module add-ons, entity counts or bundled consulting make the real total incomputable.

5 — Most editions carry real numbers with billing period stated and software separated from services; at least one commonly needed module or scale step is unpriced.

8 — Every edition and module priced publicly with entity/user boundaries and setup fees stated; only genuine corporate-group contracts are custom.

10 — Complete price computability: modules, scale steps, service packages and renewal rules public, so the invoice for a 100-employee company and a 10-client consultancy is a two-minute exercise.

Report an error

The IT Integrator

Three named tiers with features and user and entity limits published, plus a free trial, but no prices on the page, with every tier ending in a demo or quote request. Only the trial is free to compute; the real invoice is a sales conversation. 2 8

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

2 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

Ownership Not determined — uncited Report an error
Data residency Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified 0/2 pts 5 Report an error

Where this could be wrong

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

Do you know more about Dastra? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (13)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor homepage (EN) www.dastra.eu Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Vendor pricing page www.dastra.eu Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Features overview www.dastra.eu Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Legal notice/imprint www.dastra.eu Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Privacy policy www.dastra.eu Checked 17 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Security / trust page www.dastra.eu Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Records & DPIA depth — found from sitemap learn.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Data subject rights & incidents — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Data subject rights & incidents — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Integrations & automation — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Integrations & automation — found from sitemap www.dastra.eu Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →