E-Signature
eID Easy
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by eID Easy OÜ · eideasy.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
eID Easy at a glance
- Vendor
- eID Easy OÜ
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates eID Easy 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. eID Easy presents itself as an integration hub rather than a sender's document tool: one API and one contract reach Qualified (QES) and Advanced (AdES) eSignatures, eSealing, timestamping and validation through more than 80 qualified trust service providers, with 80+ methods covering 160+ countries and territories. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
eID Easy presents itself as an integration hub rather than a sender's document tool: one API and one contract reach Qualified (QES) and Advanced (AdES) eSignatures, eSealing, timestamping and validation through more than 80 qualified trust service providers, with 80+ methods covering 160+ countries and territories. Its strongest scores come on evidence and retention at 7-8, crediting qualified timestamps under eIDAS, archival signatures timestamped by different providers so one compromise cannot invalidate a document, and an automated validation API checking certificates against official EU Trusted Lists. Signature levels follow at 6-7 with the legal effect of both levels spelled out. The weakness is signing workflow at 3-4: the captured pages document the signer-side flow, with no public information on templates, signing order or reminders. Integration and API spans 4-6 — higher where judges valued the full API reference, lower where they wanted connectors into business applications. Sovereignty scores 5-6: an Estonian contracting entity, privacy policy stating EU/EEA processing, and we found no public information naming subprocessors or data centres. The commercial signals are a free demo and a 15-minute expert call.
Speaks for it
- Evidence and retention scores 7-8 on qualified eIDAS timestamps, archival signatures timestamped by different providers, and an automated validation API checked against official EU Trusted Lists.
- Signature levels scores 6-7, with QES legally equivalent to a handwritten signature across all EU member states and AdES unable to be denied legal effect under eIDAS.
- One API and one contract reach QES, AdES, eSealing, timestamping and validation through 80+ providers with automatic failover.
- Retention is stated concretely — signed files deleted after 7 days or sooner on API call, unsigned files after 14, logs after 90, with optional encrypted storage of signed containers.
- The contracting entity is EID Easy OÜ of Tallinn, and the privacy policy states all information is stored and processed within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries.
Held against it
- Signing workflow scores 3-4: we found no public information on templates, field placement, signing order, reminders or a sender's status overview.
- We found no public information on connectors to Microsoft 365, CRM, HR or document-management systems — the documented integrations are the trust-service and identity providers themselves.
- We found no public information naming an individual trust service provider with its EU Trust List entry, an identification provider, or retention rules for identification data itself.
- We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs or published rate limits.
- We found no public prices — the commercial signals on the captured pages are a free demo and a 15-minute expert call.
Best for
- You are a development team embedding QES, AdES, seals, timestamps and validation into your own portal through one documented API under a single contract.
- You need long-term evidence for disputes — qualified timestamps, archival signatures from different providers, and a machine-readable validation record checked against official EU Trusted Lists.
- Your signers span many countries and you want 80+ eSignature and eID methods covering 160+ countries and territories.
- You want an EU-based contracting entity — EID Easy OÜ of Tallinn — whose privacy policy states storage and processing within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries.
Avoid if
- You need a sender-side document tool out of the box — templates, signing order, reminders, a status overview — rather than building the workflow around the API yourself.
- You expect to send documents for signature from inside Microsoft 365, your CRM or your HR system without building the integration yourself.
- You need public price information to budget before a sales conversation — the captured pages show only a free demo and a 15-minute expert call.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| eIDAS levels & trust services | 3 of 5 |
| Signer identification | 3 of 5 |
| Signing workflow & signer experience | 2 of 5 |
| Evidence, validation & retention | 3.5 of 5 |
| Integrations & API | 2.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
eIDAS levels & trust services
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Which signature levels the platform offers — simple, advanced, qualified, and qualified seals — through which qualified trust service provider on the EU Trust List, for which countries and legal regimes (eIDAS, ZertES), and on which plans.
0 — Not an electronic signature service: a PDF annotation or form tool that places a drawn or typed signature image without any eIDAS signature behind it.
3 — Electronic signatures at the simple level (SES) described as compliant with eIDAS; advanced and qualified levels and the trust service provider are basic or not described.
5 — Simple and advanced or qualified signatures (SES with AdES or QES) offered and named as eIDAS levels, with the plans or add-ons that include them and which documents need which level explained for Germany or the EU.
8 — SES, AdES and QES all documented with the plans and countries they are available in, the qualified trust service provider named with its entry on the EU Trust List linked, QES under eIDAS (and ZertES where relevant) stated, qualified electronic seals for company documents, and the signature level shown in the signed document and audit trail.
10 — Levels are an explicit product decision: the provider is or contracts a named QTSP with its conformity assessment published, level selection per document type or template, remote QES without a separate account, EUDI wallet support stated with a date, and the legal effect per level documented for the main EU markets.
The Legal Counsel
Qualified and advanced signatures are named as eIDAS levels with their legal effect documented — the qualified level equivalent to a handwritten signature across the EU, the advanced level protected from denial of legal effect — delivered through integration with over eighty qualified trust service providers and validation against the official EU Trusted Lists. Qualified seals are offered and EU Digital Identity Wallet support carries a 2027 expectation. We found no public information naming a single trust service provider with its Trust List entry, no simple-signature level, and no plan structure attaching levels to prices. 1 4 5 7 9 10
The HR Operations Lead
Qualified and advanced signatures are named as eIDAS levels, with the qualified workflow explained and qualified signatures stated as legally equivalent to a handwritten signature across all EU member states. Over 80 qualified trust service providers are reachable through one API with automatic failover, electronic sealing is offered, and readiness for the EU Digital Identity Wallet is stated with a 2027 date. We found no public information naming an individual trust service provider with its EU Trust List entry, and a simple signature level as a distinct offering is not documented. 1 4 5 10
The Revenue Operations Lead
Advanced and qualified signatures are named as eIDAS levels with the legal effect spelled out — qualified is legally equivalent to handwriting, created on a qualified creation device with a certificate from a trust service provider — behind more than 80 providers with automatic failover, plus company eSealing and a 2027 EU wallet timeline. We found no public information on a simple signature level, on which plan includes which level, or on a named trust service provider linked to its EU Trust List entry. 1 4 5 8 10
The Integration Engineer
Advanced and qualified signatures are both documented as eIDAS levels with their legal effect, signing steps and cross-region use explained, and e-sealing sits beside them with over eighty qualified trust service providers reachable through one integration. We found no public information naming a specific trust service provider with its EU Trust List entry, on a simple-signature level, or on which plans include which level, so the top anchors stay out of reach. 1 4 5 10
The Data Protection Officer
Advanced and qualified signatures are named as eIDAS levels with legal effect stated — QES legally equivalent to handwritten and recognised across EU member states, with use cases from statutory contracts to notarial acts — plus eSealing and wallet support dated to 2027. But the trust model aggregates 80+ providers worldwide rather than naming one qualified trust service provider with its EU Trust List entry, and we found no public information on which plans include which level. 1 4 5 7 10
The Skeptic
Advanced and qualified signatures each get their own pages, with legal effect spelled out — a QES legally equivalent to a handwritten signature across all EU member states, an AdES that cannot be denied legal effect under eIDAS — and signing routed through over 80 QTSPs across Europe, LATAM and APAC rather than a trust service the provider operates itself. We found no public information naming a specific QTSP with an EU Trust List entry, on plans or add-ons per level, or on the signature level being shown in the signed document and audit trail. eSealing is offered as a feature, though not stated as a qualified seal. 1 4 5
Signer identification
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the signer is identified for each level: email and SMS codes, video ident, eID card (Online-Ausweis), bank ident or EUDI wallet — who performs it, in which countries it works, and what happens to the ID data afterwards.
0 — No signer authentication offered: by the vendor's own description anyone holding the link can sign.
3 — Signers authenticated by an email link with an access code or SMS code; identification for advanced and qualified signatures is basic or not described.
5 — Email, SMS or access-code authentication, plus identification methods for AdES or QES listed by name (for example video ident, eID card, bank ident), with the countries or ID documents they accept stated.
8 — Methods documented per level and country with the identification provider named, automated and agent-based ident distinguished, reuse of an identification for later signatures explained, retention and deletion of ID data stated, and the ident provider listed as subprocessor.
10 — Identification is transparent end to end: every method with its countries, assurance level and completion guidance, EUDI wallet and national eID supported, ID data minimisation and retention committed, and the signer-facing privacy notice published.
The Legal Counsel
Identification is described per level — one-factor PIN or biometric for advanced signatures, high-assurance eID, video identification and bank-based methods for qualified signatures — with coverage across Europe, Latin America and Asia-Pacific, reusable identity signals, and deletion timelines published in the privacy policy. We found no public information naming the identification providers or listing them as subprocessors, nor what happens to identity document data at those providers. 1 3 4 5 6
The HR Operations Lead
Qualified-signature identity verification is described as eID, video identification or other qualified methods recognised under national law, while advanced signatures use one-factor authentication such as a PIN or biometric; national eIDs and bank-based identity are offered across Europe with the wallet as one channel among them. The breadth suits the IDs applicants actually hold: 80+ eSignature and eID methods covering 160+ countries and territories. We found no public information on accepted ID documents per country or a named identification provider, and beyond file deletion timelines we found no public information on retention of identification data itself. 1 3 4 5 6
The Revenue Operations Lead
Identification is the pitch: national eIDs and bank-based identity across more than 160 countries, video identification named for qualified signing, PSD2 multi-factor flows, reusable high-assurance identity signals, and the EU wallet framed as one channel in the hub. We found no public information on the individual identification providers per country, automated versus agent-based checks, or what happens to identity data after verification. 1 5 6 7
The Integration Engineer
Qualified signing is described with identity verified by eID, video identification or other qualified methods, while advanced signatures use one-factor PIN or biometric, spread across eighty-plus methods and 160-plus countries with national eIDs and bank-based identity named as categories. Retention for files and logs is published and all processing stays within the EU/EEA, but we found no public information naming the individual identification providers, distinguishing automated from agent-based checks, or itemising what happens to identity data itself. 3 4 5 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
Identification is documented per level: advanced signatures use one-factor PIN or biometric, QES uses two-factor with identity verified via eID, video identification or other qualified methods, across 80+ methods in 160+ countries with a provider directory. We found no public information on retention or deletion of the identification data itself, and no identification provider is named as a subprocessor — the privacy policy covers files and logs but not ID data specifically. 1 4 5 6 7
The Skeptic
Identification methods are described by category — eID, video identification, bank-based identity — with QES said to use two-factor authentication such as smart card plus PIN or mobile app plus OTP, and reusable high-assurance identity signals are mentioned. Coverage is stated only in aggregate, 80+ methods across 160+ countries, and we found no public information naming an identification provider or giving per-method countries and accepted ID documents. Deletion periods are published for files and logs generally rather than for identification data specifically. 1 3 5 6 7
Signing workflow & signer experience
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting a document out and back signed: templates and form fields, signing order and roles, bulk sending, reminders and delegation, signing without an account or app, mobile signing, and accessibility for signers.
0 — Not a signing workflow: the product signs a document locally for the user and sends nothing out to other signers.
3 — Documents sent to one or more signers by email with fields placed on the PDF; templates, signing order and reminders are basic or not described.
5 — Templates with field placement, several signers with a signing order, automatic reminders, signing in the browser on mobile without an account, and a status overview for the sender.
8 — Roles and conditional fields, parallel and sequential order, bulk sending, delegation and substitute signers, team and approval workflows, a branded signer experience, signer languages listed, and signer accessibility addressed.
10 — The workflow is complete and documented: web forms and self-service signing links, mixed signature levels within one process, in-person and remote signing, a published accessibility conformance statement, and team administration with shared templates and audit of sender actions.
The Legal Counsel
Signing runs through an API flow that redirects the signer to complete the signature, with batch signing and one-shot signatures offered. We found no public information on templates, field placement, signing order, reminders, delegation, or the signer-facing experience — the platform hands off to providers, and the surrounding workflow is not described on the pages read. 1 4 5 8
The HR Operations Lead
The signer flow is documented end to end — identity verification, signature creation with options such as mobile app plus one-time password, and cryptographic locking — with batch signing and one-shot signatures offered and advanced signing described as fast and low-friction without hardware tokens. For the sending side I depend on, we found no public information on templates, field placement, signing order, automatic reminders, or a branded mobile signing experience for new hires. 1 4 5
The Revenue Operations Lead
The documented flow is a redirected signer passing identity verification, signature creation and document locking, with batch signing, one-shot signatures and hash signatures in the feature list — plumbing for developers, not a rep's send button. We found no public information on templates, signing order, automatic reminders, delegation, a sender status overview, or the mobile, no-account signer experience that decides whether a quote comes back same-day. 1 4 5 10
The Integration Engineer
The documented flow runs identity verification, signature creation and document locking, with batch signing and one-shot signatures listed and the signer redirected back to the calling application afterwards. We found no public information on templates with field placement, signing order, automatic reminders, delegation or signer accessibility. 1 4 5
The Data Protection Officer
Batch signing, one-shot signature and hash signatures are published, and the API sample shows a signing redirect, but we found no public information on templates, field placement, signing order, reminders, signing without an account, mobile signing or signer accessibility. 1 5 10
The Skeptic
The captured pages document the signer-side flow — identity verification, signature creation, document locking — plus batch, one-shot and hash signing through the API, but the product presents itself as an integration hub for signature and identity providers rather than a sender's document tool. We found no public information on templates, field placement, signing order, reminders, a sender's status overview, or signer accessibility. 1 4 5
Evidence, validation & retention
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What proves a signature years later: the audit trail and certificate of completion, qualified timestamps, long-term validation (PAdES-LTV), validation reports, and how long signed documents and evidence are kept — and whether they can leave the platform.
0 — No evidence produced: by the vendor's own description the result is a flattened PDF with a signature image and no audit trail or certificate.
3 — An audit trail or completion certificate with the signed PDF; its contents, timestamps and the retention period are basic or not described.
5 — An audit trail or certificate of completion recording signer events, time and authentication method, attached to or embedded in the signed PDF, timestamps applied, and signed documents downloadable.
8 — PAdES signatures with long-term validation, qualified timestamps from a named provider, a validation tool or report, retention period stated and configurable with automatic deletion, and bulk export of documents with their evidence.
10 — Evidence outlives the subscription: LTV and archive timestamps documented, validation verifiable with independent tools such as the EU DSS validator, export to a DMS or archive with evidence intact, and post-termination access and deletion committed in the terms.
The Legal Counsel
The evidence story is strong for a dispute eight years out: qualified timestamps under eIDAS, archival signatures drawing timestamps from different providers so one compromise cannot invalidate the file, an automated validation service checking integrity, revocation and the issuing authority against the official EU Trusted Lists, and a machine-readable validation record for archiving. Retention is stated — signed files deleted after seven days or sooner on API call, with optional encrypted storage of signed containers — but we found no public information on bulk export of documents with evidence intact or post-termination access commitments. 3 5 8 9
The HR Operations Lead
Qualified timestamps under eIDAS, archival signatures drawing timestamps from several providers, and a signature-extension feature are documented, alongside an automated validation API that checks signer details, revocation status, timestamps and the issuing authority against official EU Trusted Lists and returns a machine-readable record. Retention is explicit: uploaded and signed files are deleted after 7 days, or sooner if the relevant API call is made, with optional encrypted storage of signed containers. We found no public information naming the timestamp provider, or on bulk export of documents with their evidence. 3 8 9
The Revenue Operations Lead
Evidence is the strongest part: qualified timestamps from trust service providers, archival signatures timestamped by multiple providers so one compromise cannot kill the document, and an automated validation service checking integrity, revocation and the official EU Trusted Lists, returning a machine-readable record and validating even external signatures. Retention is explicit — signed files deleted after 7 days or earlier on API call, unsigned after 14, logs after 90, with optional encrypted storage of signed containers — though we found no public information on bulk export of documents with their evidence or verification with independent tools. 3 8 9
The Integration Engineer
This is the strongest area for my purposes: qualified timestamps under eIDAS, archival signatures timestamped by multiple providers so one compromise does not destroy validity, a signature-extension feature, and an automated validation API that checks cryptography, revocation, timestamps and the issuing authority against the official EU Trusted Lists and returns a machine-readable record I can embed and archive. Retention is stated precisely — signed files deleted after 7 days unless encrypted server-side storage is opted into, logs after 90 days — but we found no public information on configurable long-term retention or bulk export of documents together with their evidence. 3 5 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
Evidence is unusually well covered: qualified timestamps from QTSPs under eIDAS, archival signatures using timestamps from different providers so one compromise does not destroy the archive, and an automated validation API checking cryptography, revocation and issuing authorities against official EU Trusted Lists with a machine-readable record. Retention is stated concretely with deletion on API call, though we found no public information naming the timestamp provider or on bulk export of documents together with their evidence. 3 5 8 9
The Skeptic
Qualified timestamps under eIDAS, archival signatures timestamped by multiple providers so a single compromise does not invalidate the archive, a signature-extension feature, and a validation API that checks certificates and timestamps against official EU Trusted Lists and returns a machine-readable record make the long-term evidence story genuinely documented, though we found no public information naming the timestamp providers. Retention is stated and partly controllable — signed files deleted after 7 days or sooner on an API call, unsigned files after 14, logs after 90, with optional encrypted storage of signed containers — windows short enough that the customer's own archive carries the evidence. We found no public information on validation with independent tools or on post-termination access to documents and evidence. 3 8 9
Integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Signing from inside the systems where contracts are made: a documented API with webhooks and a sandbox, embedded signing, and connectors for Microsoft 365, CRM, HR, DMS and ERP systems.
0 — A closed web app by the vendor's own description: no API and no integrations offered.
3 — A few named integrations or a Zapier or Make connector; a documented API is basic or not described.
5 — A documented REST API with webhooks, plus named integrations with Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace and at least one CRM, HR or storage system.
8 — A sandbox, embedded signing in the customer's own application, API access to every signature level, versioned API with rate limits published, SDKs, and connectors for named DMS, ERP or HR systems with their scope.
10 — Integration is a product: white-label and embedded flows documented, API parity with the web app, a status page with incident history, deprecation policy, and a marketplace of integrations with stated maintainers.
The Legal Counsel
The API is the product: one documented interface with a full reference, sample requests, a supported-methods guide and a status page, carrying advanced and qualified signatures, seals, timestamps and validation under a single contract. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, or connectors for Microsoft 365, CRM, HR or document-management systems — the integration network is with trust service providers, not business software. 1 2 8 9 10
The HR Operations Lead
The API is the product: a full API reference, supported methods, a guide and a sample request authenticated with client credentials, all under a single contract and single API covering providers across Europe, LATAM and APAC. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, or connectors into the Microsoft 365, CRM or HR systems where our contracts are drafted. 1 2 4 10
The Revenue Operations Lead
The API is the product — a full reference, a sample request authenticated with client credentials, supported methods, a guide, a status link and a six-page provider directory — and one API reaches every signature level, timestamps, eSealing and validation under a single contract. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, or named connectors for a CRM, Microsoft 365, HR or document management systems, so signing from inside the CRM is a build-it-yourself project. 1 2 8 9 10
The Integration Engineer
Everything runs through one documented API under a single contract — qualified signatures, advanced signatures, seals, timestamping and validation all reachable programmatically, with a full reference, guide, supported methods and a status page — which is exactly the shape I need for embedding in our portal. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, API versioning or connectors for Microsoft 365, CRM, HR or DMS systems. 1 2 4 8 10
The Data Protection Officer
The documented REST API is the product itself: a full reference, guide, supported methods and status are published, with a sample request showing files, client credentials and a signing redirect, all under a single contract reaching 80+ providers. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, or connectors to Microsoft 365, CRM or document management systems. 1 2 8 9 10
The Skeptic
The API is the product: a full API reference with sample requests, one contract and one API covering advanced and qualified signatures, seals and timestamps across 80+ providers, plus a status page and developer documentation. We found no public information on webhooks, a sandbox, SDKs, published rate limits, or connectors into Microsoft 365, CRM, HR or document management systems — the integrations documented are the trust-service and identity providers themselves, not business applications. 1 4 8 10
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity, the trust service provider and their owners are, where documents, audit trails and ID data are stored and processed, and who the subprocessors are. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Proven non-EU on every dimension the evidence covers: non-EU contracting entity and non-EU storage of documents and signer data, with no EU option stated.
3 — One European element proven: an EU contracting entity or EU representative, EU data storage stated, an EU qualified trust service provider, or a published DPA, with the rest of the chain unstated.
5 — EU contracting entity or EU representative and EU storage of documents stated as standard or selectable, with a DPA offered; the hosting, identification or trust service chain is unstated or partly non-EU.
8 — EU entity, documents, audit trails and ID data stored in named EU data centres, an EU qualified trust service provider, subprocessor list with locations published, and certifications (ISO 27001, ETSI conformity) published.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity and EU QTSP, every processing location and subprocessor European, customer-selectable data residency, and certifications with their scope published.
The Legal Counsel
The contracting entity is Estonian with registry code and VAT number published, processing is stated to remain within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries, a data processing agreement is referenced, and Estonian law with the Harju County Court governs disputes. The trust and identification chain is deliberately worldwide — providers across Latin America and Asia-Pacific — and we found no public information on a subprocessor list with locations or named EU data centres. 2 3 4 9 10
The HR Operations Lead
The contracting entity is eID Easy OÜ of Tallinn, Estonia with registry code and VAT number published, and the privacy policy states all information is stored and processed within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries, under Estonian law with the Estonian Data Protection Inspectorate named, a data processing agreement available and ISO 27001 certification published. We found no public information on named data centres or a subprocessor list with locations, and the provider network itself spans Europe, LATAM and APAC. 1 3 10
The Revenue Operations Lead
The captured pages prove a European frame: eID Easy OÜ registered in Tallinn, Estonian governing law with disputes in Harju County Court, all information stored and processed inside the EU/EEA with no third-country transfers, plus a data processing agreement and ISO 27001 cited. The trust chain is global by design — over 80 providers covering more than 160 countries — and we found no public information on named data centres, a subprocessor list with locations, or published ETSI conformity. 1 3 9
The Integration Engineer
The contracting entity is Estonian with registry and VAT numbers published, all information is stated to be stored and processed within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries, a data processing agreement is offered, ISO 27001 is claimed, and the Estonian Data Protection Inspectorate is named as supervisory authority. The trust service and identification chain runs through providers worldwide, and we found no public information on named data centres, a subprocessor list with locations, or ownership behind the entity. 1 3 9
The Data Protection Officer
The contracting entity is EID Easy OÜ of Tallinn with registry code and VAT published, under Estonian law with the Estonian Data Protection Inspectorate named, and the privacy policy states all information is stored and processed within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries, backed by ISO 27001 and a referenced data processing agreement. The trust chain itself is global — providers across Europe, LATAM and APAC — and we found no public information on subprocessor locations, named data centres or ownership, while the site runs Google Analytics and HubSpot chat cookies. 1 3 9 10
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is Estonian — EID Easy OÜ of Tallinn, registry code 14080014 — and the privacy policy states all information is stored and processed within the EU/EEA with no transfers to third countries, under Estonian law and an Estonian supervisory authority, with a DPA available and ISO 27001 claimed. We found no public information naming the EU data centres or a subprocessor list with locations, ownership is not evidenced, and the trust services themselves come from providers spanning Europe, LATAM and APAC. 1 3 10
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the cost of their signing volume from public pages alone — plan prices, envelope or document limits, the per-signature price of AdES and QES, identification fees, API pricing and overage.
0 — No public prices at all; every plan is a sales conversation.
3 — A public "from" price or one priced plan, per user or flat.
5 — Plan prices public for the main plans with the billing period stated and the envelope or document limits and main features per plan listed.
8 — Every plan and limit priced publicly, AdES and QES priced per signature, identification fees and overage stated, API pricing published, and contract term and notice period given.
10 — Complete cost computability: the cost of a given monthly volume per signature level derivable from public pages, volume tiers published, and every add-on and price-change term on a public page.
The Legal Counsel
We found no public prices on any page read — no plan prices, no per-signature rates for advanced or qualified signatures, no identification fees and no API pricing. What is public is a free demo and an invitation to a fifteen-minute expert call, which makes cost a sales conversation rather than a computation. 1 7
The HR Operations Lead
We found no public prices at all: no plan prices, no per-signature price for advanced or qualified signatures, no identification fees and no API pricing. The captured pages show a free demo and an invitation to book a 15-minute call with an expert, so the cost of a qualified signature cannot be known before the contract is signed. 1 7 10
The Revenue Operations Lead
We found no public information on plan prices, per-signature cost for advanced or qualified signatures, identification fees, or API pricing — nothing a buyer could compute a monthly signing bill from. The only public commercial signals on the captured pages are a free demo and a fifteen-minute expert call. 1 6 7 10
The Integration Engineer
Across the pages we read we found no public plan prices, no per-signature figures for advanced or qualified signatures, and no identification fees or API pricing; the only pricing-related items are a free demo and a fifteen-minute expert call. A buyer cannot compute the cost of any signing volume from public information. 1 7 10
The Data Protection Officer
Across the captured pages we found no public prices at all: no plan prices, per-signature fees for advanced or qualified signatures, identification fees, API pricing or volume limits. The only commercial signals are a free demo and a 15-minute expert call, so a buyer cannot compute any cost from these pages. 1 7 10
The Skeptic
What the captured pages offer toward cost is a free demo and a 15-minute expert call. We found no public information on plan prices, envelope or document limits, per-signature QES or AdES pricing, identification fees, or API pricing — a buyer cannot compute any part of their cost from these pages. 1 7 10
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about eID Easy
Is eID Easy European?
Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where eID Easy is based.
Where does eID Easy store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
Does eID Easy have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.
What are the best alternatives to eID Easy?
As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates sproof sign (3.5/5), MOXIS (3.5/5) and Signicat Sign (3/5) highest among the other 22 E-Signature products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is sproof sign (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: eID Easy alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 3 Nov 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Transfer impact assessment, Legal entity, Hosting location. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
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.
- 6 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy — found from the homepage www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 4 EIDAS levels & trust services — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 5 EIDAS levels & trust services — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 6 Signer identification — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 7 Signer identification — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 8 Evidence, validation & retention — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 9 Evidence, validation & retention — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
- 10 Integrations & API — found from sitemap www.eideasy.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →