whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Information Security

preeco | informationssicherheit

EU-Made Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

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

by preeco GmbH & Co. KG · www.preeco.de

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 Evidence Integrator

Weighted verdict

Believes evidence that is typed is evidence that is stale. Optimizes for connectors to the live estate — directory, CMDB, ticketing, cloud — continuous control checks, and an API with parity to the UI. 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 Evidence Integrator

Asset & risk management depth

How this is scored

The ISMS core: asset inventory, risk methodology (identification, assessment, treatment), protection-needs inheritance, incident handling with statutory clocks.

0 — No ISMS substance; "information security" is a chapter in the marketing site.

3 — A flat risk list and an asset spreadsheet import; no treatment tracking, no inheritance, incidents live in the ticket system.

5 — Asset and risk management with configurable matrices and treatment tracking; basic incident handling; inheritance and aggregation need manual work.

8 — A real risk backbone: documented methodology (ISO 27005 or equivalent), inherited protection needs across asset relations, incident workflows with statutory reporting clocks (NIS2 24h/72h), risk acceptance with ownership.

10 — Risk management a certifier works inside: complete asset-risk-treatment chain with inheritance, continuity planning, incident reporting with authority export, and risk reporting the executive level actually reads.

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

A real risk backbone is on the pages: protection-needs assessment follows BSI IT-Grundschutz methodology with maximum principle and accumulation across linked assets, inheritance information is updated on asset release, and incidents carry automatic statutory deadline monitoring with nine ready report templates for BSI and GDPR notifications. Risk acceptance appears as consciously accepted residual-risk exceptions counted separately in the cockpit, with risk methodology freely definable and risks linked to measures; we found no public information on continuity planning. 17 14 12 2 8 13

Report an error

Controls, SoA & measures

How this is scored

Control catalogs, statement of applicability, measure tracking and internal audit — whether the control side of the ISMS is operable or a checklist.

0 — A static control checklist; applicability, implementation status and evidence are the consultant's spreadsheet.

3 — Control catalogs with status fields, but no SoA generation, no measure ownership, no link between controls and risks.

5 — Controls linked to risks and measures with owners and due dates; SoA producible with manual assembly; internal audit supported by checklists.

8 — SoA on demand from live control status, measure tracking with delegation and escalation, internal audit workflows with findings management, controls carrying their own evidence.

10 — The control fabric as a living system: catalog updates versioned, SoA always current, audit programs with recurring schedules, and every control answerable with linked evidence at any moment.

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

Measures carry owners, status and versioning and link to identified risks and protection needs, and every requirement has its own evidence tab; exclusion justifications flow automatically into a Statement of Applicability that files as an immutable, dated version per catalog. We found no public information on measure delegation and escalation or on findings management inside internal audit workflows, and the captured pages state exactly one catalog can be active per organization. 15 16 20 2

Report an error

Framework & standard coverage

How this is scored

Which regimes the product actually operationalizes — ISO 27001, NIS2, TISAX/VDA ISA, DORA, BSI IT-Grundschutz, SOC 2 — and whether one control maps across them or each framework is a fresh island.

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

3 — Two or three frameworks as separate checklists; the same control is answered once per framework.

5 — The major regimes for its market with partial cross-mapping; newer regimes (NIS2, DORA) present as content packs of varying depth.

8 — Broad current coverage including NIS2/TISAX/DORA where relevant, one-control-many-frameworks mapping, and visible maintenance as regimes evolve.

10 — Framework coverage as a living product: dozens of regimes, genuine multi-compliance mapping on one data basis, per-industry profiles, and documented update cadence when the standard moves.

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

Seven regimes are evidenced as ready catalogs — ISO 27001, NIS2, BSI C5, BSI IT-Grundschutz, CISIS12, VdA ISA and the communal SiKoSH — with monthly product updates as visible maintenance. Mapping one control answer across frameworks is not something we found public information on, and the captured pages state exactly one catalog is active per organization, so each regime reads as its own island; DORA appears only as a statement that new requirements are implemented promptly. 7 12 2 1

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, evidence attachments per control; assembling a full audit file still takes days.

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

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

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

Revision safety is documented in depth: immutable revisions with SHA-256 integrity checks, visual revision comparison, and complete activity logs filterable by time period and user; evidence stays permanently attached to requirements with validity dates and early-renewal warnings, and filed Statement of Applicability versions remain traceable over time. We found no public information on auditor access roles or audit-scoped evidence packs on demand, and the pages state integrity verification applies only from the feature's introduction. 19 20 16

Report an error

Integrations & automation

How this is scored

Whether the platform feeds from the real IT estate — directory import, CMDB, ticketing, scanners, API — and automates evidence collection 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, CMDB or SSO); automation is reminders and recurrence.

8 — Real connector set (Jira/ServiceNow-class ticketing, CMDB, cloud and endpoint sources), webhooks, SSO/SCIM, automated evidence tests with human review.

10 — The platform behaves like infrastructure: API parity for the data model, event streams, continuous control monitoring against the live estate, and automation that measurably removes the recurring toil rather than renaming it.

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

The vendor's own specification describes the application as a closed, self-contained system with no public REST API currently available, customer-specific endpoints being developable only for private cloud and on-premises — a data island entered by manual work, with PDF, DOCX and XLSX exports and an Excel import for training participants as the drawbridge. We found no public information on directory, CMDB, ticketing, cloud or SCIM connectors, single sign-on exists only outside the standard cloud, and what automation is shown is reminders, deadline monitoring and recurring reports, with evidence arriving by upload or link request rather than automated collection from the estate. 12 2 2 20

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the security posture of the whole company actually lives and under whose law — entity, hosting, subprocessors, DPA. The risk register is itself a target.

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

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 Evidence Integrator

A German entity is evidenced by the Ulm register court and the online-signable DPA, hosting runs exclusively in named Hetzner data centers in Nürnberg and Falkenstein with EU-only named subprocessors (Hetzner, UpCloud Finland), TOMs are downloadable and an on-premises option gives full data sovereignty. The captured pages do not show the DPA's subprocessor appendix, we found no public information on ownership, and optional customer-configured AI and translation integrations (OpenAI-compatible LLM providers, DeepL) could expose content to further providers. 5 10 12 9 2

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, scale steps 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 certification project is a two-minute exercise.

Report an error

The Evidence Integrator

The licensing and pricing model is created as a separate, individual offer depending on employee count, modules and hosting variant, and we found no public price for any edition or module anywhere on the captured pages. The surrounding mechanics are published — annual subscription with monthly or yearly billing, no setup fees or cancellation periods, updates and support included, and the IT-Grundschutz, CISIS12 and VdA ISA catalogs named as optional paid add-ons — so a buyer can describe the invoice's shape but not compute it. 12 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 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 EU only ⚠ unverified 3/3 pts 9 Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited 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 preeco | informationssicherheit? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (20)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 15 Sep 2026, 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Information security product page www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 16 Sep 2026, 15 Sep 2026, 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  3. 3 About page www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Imprint www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Privacy policy www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Product documentation library www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 16 Sep 2026, 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  7. 7 SoA automation doc www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +3 earlier captures: 15 Sep 2026, 24 Aug 2026, 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  8. 8 ISMS cockpit metrics doc www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Hosting variants page www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 16 Sep 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Published DPA (AVV) for cloud customers www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Multi-entity use case page www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Full product specification (Leistungsbeschreibung) www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 +2 earlier captures: 16 Sep 2026, 24 Aug 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Asset & risk management depth — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Asset & risk management depth — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Controls, SoA & measures — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  16. 16 Controls, SoA & measures — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  17. 17 Framework & standard coverage — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  18. 18 Framework & standard coverage — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  19. 19 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
  20. 20 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap www.preeco.de Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →