whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Information Security

Robin Data ComplianceOS (ISMS)

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 Robin Data GmbH · www.robin-data.io

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 Drafted IT Officer

Weighted verdict

SME IT admin who became the information security officer by an email from management. Optimizes for guided setup, sane defaults, plain-language controls and a tool that runs alongside the day job. Rejects platforms that assume a security team and a consultant on retainer.

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

Scored by The Drafted IT Officer

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 Drafted IT Officer

The asset-and-risk pair is real: asset classes with repeatable protection-need assessments, custom assessment forms per asset class, a BSI-style risk analysis with a whitepaper walking you through it, treatment strategies, and dashboards showing scores over time — exactly the guided, plain-language setup that runs alongside my day job. We found no public information on incident workflows with statutory reporting clocks, and inheritance of protection needs across related assets appears to be manual work, which holds it at the middle rung for me. 6 7

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 Drafted IT Officer

Controls arrive as importable programs where you answer applied yes/no with a written justification, set status with colour coding for norm deviation, rate maturity per control, and manage measures against a starter database of 350-plus industries with a created/checked/approved release workflow. The measure fields shown include no owner or due date, we found no public information on a generated statement of applicability, and the captured help states own and imported programs cannot be linked with each other — so the same question gets answered once per framework. 8 9 12

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 Drafted IT Officer

The importable catalogue is respectable for a German SME: ISO 27001, ISO 9001, ISO 27701, ISO 55001, DIN 66398, BSI IT-Grundschutz, TISAX, B3S, plus the GDPR and a shelf of German laws, and you can build your own programs. But we found no public information on NIS2 or DORA content, and with own and importable programs not linkable I see no one-control-many-frameworks mapping — each regime is effectively its own checklist. 8 12

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 Drafted IT Officer

The audit module is genuine: internal and external audits with configurable types, audit numbers and periods, activities and evidence creatable straight from the audit context, importable and extendable evidence types, attachments and external links on every record, and completed assessments become immutable — that immutability is what makes a file defensible to an external auditor. We found no public information on auditor access roles or audit-scoped evidence packs on demand, so assembling the full file still lands on my weekend. 12 13 9

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 Drafted IT Officer

The homepage promises third-party systems connectable via "eine moderne Schnittstelle" and microservices, but we found no documented API details, no directory import, no connectors to ticketing or CMDB, and no automated evidence collection. What the help documents is Excel export for assets and risks plus imports of TOMs, programs and evidence types — which for someone like me is re-typing by other means. 1 6 7 9

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 Drafted IT Officer

The vendor is a German GmbH with a register court in Stendal, its own ISO 27001 certificate, EFRE funding, and energy claims comparing to typical European data centres — the posture reads comfortingly local. But we found no public DPA, no subprocessor list, and hosting location is not confirmed on the captured pages, and for the system that would hold my risk register I can't leave that open. 3 4

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 Drafted IT Officer

We found no public prices for the software, the per-program licences (whose control contents stay hidden until you acquire a licence), or the 60-partner consulting network; the funnel starts with a demo meeting. The only cost statements we found are that webinars and document support are free of charge — welcome, but they don't let me budget an invoice. 3 8 9

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 Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors Not determined — 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 Robin Data ComplianceOS (ISMS)? 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 www.robin-data.io Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Platform overview www.robin-data.io Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 About page www.robin-data.io Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Imprint www.robin-data.io Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Information security product page www.robin-data.io Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Asset & risk management depth — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Asset & risk management depth — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Controls, SoA & measures — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Controls, SoA & measures — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Framework & standard coverage — found from sitemap www.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Framework & standard coverage — found from sitemap www.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Audit readiness & evidence — found from sitemap help.robin-data.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →