whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Password Management

Securden Password Vault for Enterprises

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

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

by Securden Inc. · securden.com

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

Link to this page

Securden Password Vault for Enterprises: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Securden Password Vault for Enterprises: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

Securden Password Vault for Enterprises at a glance

Vendor
Securden Inc.
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 Securden Password Vault for Enterprises 3/5, the mean of 6 judges. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 3 Nov 2026; evaluated by the panel 3 Nov 2026. all sources

Securden Password Vault for Enterprises alternatives, European ones first →

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

The Compliance Auditor

Weighted verdict

Prepares the ISO 27001 and NIS2 evidence and has to show who could see the firewall admin password last March. Wants event logs that cover views and copies, export to the SIEM, enforceable policies, and the contracting entity, hosting and subprocessors named.

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

Scored by The Compliance Auditor

Panel median The Compliance Auditor This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Compliance Auditor
Encryption model & independent audits 2 of 5 2 of 5
Sharing, roles & recovery 3.5 of 5 3.5 of 5
SSO, directory sync & provisioning 3 of 5 3.5 of 5
Audit logs, policies & reporting 3.5 of 5 4 of 5
Hosting choice, offline access & export 3 of 5 3.5 of 5
European sovereignty 2 of 5 2 of 5

Encryption model & independent audits

How this is scored

What the vendor can prove about its security design: end-to-end encryption with named algorithms and key derivation, which fields are encrypted on the device and which are not, independent audits and penetration tests with published results, a bug bounty, and incident history disclosed.

0 — Vault contents are readable by the vendor by its own description: server-side encryption with keys the vendor holds, or no encryption of stored credentials.

3 — Client-side or end-to-end encryption described with the algorithms named; key derivation, audits and the scope of what is encrypted are basic or not described.

5 — A published security whitepaper or security page naming algorithms, key derivation and the client-side encryption model, and an independent audit, penetration test or certification (ISO 27001, SOC 2) named.

8 — A stated list of which fields are and are not encrypted (including URLs and metadata), recurring independent penetration tests or code audits with dates and reports or summaries published, a public bug bounty or vulnerability disclosure policy, past security incidents documented with their impact, and open-source clients or cryptography that can be reviewed.

10 — The design is verifiable end to end: full source or cryptographic design public, every field encrypted client-side including metadata, audits by named firms repeated yearly with full reports, a threat model that states what a compromise of the vendor's servers would expose, and incident post-mortems published.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

A published security page names AES-256 for stored data and bcrypt for user passwords, with per-installation keys, key separation from the encrypted data, an optional Securosys HSM for the master key and a FIPS-compliant mode. The compliance certifications appear only as an unlabelled footer link, and we found no public information naming an independent audit, penetration test or certification result, on which fields are encrypted, on a bug bounty or on incident history. 4 3

Report an error

Sharing, roles & recovery

How this is scored

How credentials are shared and governed across a company: shared vaults or collections, role-based permissions, view-only and time-limited access, admin account recovery, emergency access, and what happens to shared items when an employee leaves.

0 — A personal password manager by the vendor's own description: no sharing between users is offered.

3 — Shared folders or vaults between users of one account; permission levels, admin recovery and offboarding are basic or not described.

5 — Shared vaults or collections with permission levels (for example read, edit, manage), groups and admin roles, and an admin account recovery or offboarding that keeps a leaver's shared items with the company.

8 — Recovery and offboarding documented with their key model, granular permissions down to hiding the password while allowing autofill, time-limited and one-time sharing with external parties, emergency access with a waiting period, delegated administration per team or location, and approval workflows for sensitive items.

10 — Access is governed and provable: least-privilege defaults, recovery and emergency access designed so the vendor never holds a key and stated so, periodic access reviews supported in the product, and every grant, change and revocation attributable to a person.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

Five predefined roles plus custom roles, folders acting as micro-vaults, and four permission levels that include launching connections without ever revealing the underlying password are documented, alongside granular restrictions that can grant use while hiding the credential. Time-limited encrypted sharing with external parties without a Securden account, approval workflows for sensitive accounts with auto-expiry and optional password reset, and a leaver report covering which passwords a departing employee accessed cover most of what an offboarding control needs. We found no public information on emergency access with a waiting period or on the key model behind admin account recovery. 5 6 9

Report an error

SSO, directory sync & provisioning

How this is scored

How the vault fits into the company's identity stack: SSO with Entra ID, Okta or Google, and the key model behind an SSO unlock; SCIM or directory sync for joiners and leavers; MFA options including hardware keys; and passkey support for users and the vault itself.

0 — A consumer product by the vendor's own description, with no business administration, SSO or directory connection offered.

3 — Users invited by email or CSV with two-factor authentication; SSO, directory sync and hardware keys are basic or not described.

5 — SSO with named identity providers (Entra ID, Okta, Google), SCIM or directory sync for provisioning and deprovisioning, and MFA including FIDO2 or hardware keys.

8 — The SSO unlock documented with how the vault key is derived or released and designed so the vendor cannot derive it, group sync driving vault permissions, automated suspension on deprovisioning, conditional access or device policies, and passkeys stored and used across platforms.

10 — Identity is integrated without trust shortcuts: the SSO key model published and independently reviewed, deprovisioning that revokes vault access and shared items immediately with a log entry, passwordless vault unlock with passkeys, and support for the customer's own key-management or trusted-device approval.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

Authentication is documented through SAML single sign-on with Active Directory, Entra ID, LDAP and Google Workspace, with continuous directory sync that auto-onboards new users and reflects deletions and disables immediately, and MFA enforcement for vault access and credential retrieval that includes YubiKey, Duo and TOTP. Directory group structures can be replicated to ease administration. We found no public information on how the vault key is derived or released at SSO unlock, on passkey support, or on conditional access or device policies. 4 8 6

Report an error

Audit logs, policies & reporting

How this is scored

What an administrator and an auditor can see and enforce: event logs of access and changes, password health and breach reports, enforceable policies (master password, MFA, sharing, export), SIEM integration, and reports an ISO 27001 or NIS2 audit can use.

0 — No administration by the vendor's own description: a personal tool with no admin console, logs or policies.

3 — An admin console with an activity list and a password health or strength report; exportable logs and enforceable policies are basic or not described.

5 — Event logs covering logins, item access, sharing and admin changes, enforceable policies for master password and MFA, and password health and breach-monitoring reports.

8 — Logs exportable or available through an API with native SIEM integration to named targets (Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel, Elastic or syslog), policies for sharing, export and browser-extension behaviour, log retention stated, and compliance reports aligned to ISO 27001, NIS2 or BSI IT-Grundschutz.

10 — Auditability is complete: every view, copy, autofill and permission change logged with user and device, logs tamper-evident and retained for a configurable period, alerting on anomalous access, and an auditor role that can read logs without access to secrets.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

This is what I weigh first for an audit file, and it holds up: every password retrieval, connection launch, sharing action and permission change is captured in tamper-proof logs tied to user, timestamp and IP address, tampering attempts trigger alerts, and events can be sent to named SIEM targets including Splunk, ArcSight and any syslog-capable solution. An auditor role can read reports and trails without broader access, the password policy is enforced with compliance and strength reports including reuse and weakness analysis, ticket-ID enforcement can gate every password view, and administrators can restrict which users may export data for offline access. We found no stated log retention period and no reports aligned by name to ISO 27001, NIS2 or IT-Grundschutz, which is what I would still have to ask the vendor for. 4 6 9 10 12

Report an error

Hosting choice, offline access & export

How this is scored

Where and how the vault runs and how the data leaves it: cloud region choice, a self-hosted or on-premises option, offline access during a vendor outage, client coverage across operating systems and browsers, and a complete, documented export and import path.

0 — Vault data cannot leave the product: the vendor states that no export is offered.

3 — Apps for common platforms and browsers and an export of vault items (for example CSV); hosting region, offline access and export completeness are basic or not described.

5 — Clients for Windows, macOS, iOS, Android and the major browsers, offline access to the vault, an EU region or self-hosted option, and export and import of vault data including from named competitors.

8 — Both EU cloud and self-hosted or on-premises deployment documented, Linux clients, a status page with incident history, an encrypted full-fidelity export covering all item types including attachments, and vault access continuing during an outage of the vendor's service.

10 — The customer can run and leave the vault on their own terms: self-hosting with documented high availability and backup, an open or documented export format that preserves structure, permissions and history, and a stated procedure for continued access if the vendor ends the service.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

On-premises installation on Windows servers, deployment on private AWS or Azure clusters, and a SaaS version storing data in data centres located in the EU and USA are all documented, reachable from any operating system through a browser with extensions for Chrome, Firefox, Edge and Safari. Offline access is handled by an admin-controlled export to an encrypted HTML file protected by a user-supplied passphrase that is not stored anywhere, deliverable on demand or on a schedule to a mailbox. We found no public information on a status page with incident history, on export covering all item types including attachments, or on import from other password managers — and the security page states there is no offline caching in the extensions and mobile apps, which always connect to the server to fetch data. 11 12 4

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where vault data and metadata are hosted, and who the subprocessors are. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; end-to-end encryption narrows what a foreign authority could compel, but metadata, logs and the update channel for the client software remain in the vendor's hands, so the chain still counts.

0 — Proven non-EU on every dimension the evidence covers: non-EU vendor and contracting entity and non-EU hosting, with no EU or self-hosted option stated.

3 — One European element proven: an EU data region, an EU contracting entity or EU representative, a self-hosted option, or a published DPA, with the rest of the chain unstated.

5 — EU hosting as standard or selectable, or a self-hosted option, and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, with a DPA offered; the parent company or parts of the chain (support, analytics, email, client distribution) are unstated or non-EU.

8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published with locations, a DPA covering vault metadata and logs, and a self-hosted option that removes the vendor from the data path.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, certifications published (ISO 27001, BSI C5 or equivalent), and source code or builds verifiable so the client update channel is not a blind trust in the vendor.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

The contracting entity is Securden, Inc. with addresses in New Jersey and Delaware, and the captured pages state data is stored in data centres located in the EU and USA; an on-premises self-hosted version removes the vendor from the data path. Google Analytics is named for the website, and EEA transfers are said to carry safeguards, while the privacy policy notes data may be transferred to and processed in the United States. We found no public information on an EU contracting entity or representative, on a published data processing agreement, or on a subprocessor list with locations for the hosted service, so the chain remains only partly proven. 2 11 12

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per user and tier, which features (SSO, SCIM, SIEM, self-hosting) sit in which tier, minimum seats, add-ons, and the minimum term.

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

3 — A public "from" price or one priced tier, per user or flat.

5 — Per-user prices public for the business tiers with the billing period stated and the main features per tier listed.

8 — Every tier priced publicly with its feature set and seat minimum, add-on prices listed, self-hosted licensing stated, minimum term and VAT treatment given.

10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given number of users, with every add-on, self-hosting licence, support level and renewal condition published.

Report an error

The Compliance Auditor

The captured pages give different figures for the free trial — thirty days fully functional with no credit card required on the downloads page, fourteen-day trials on the product pages — but we found no public price for any edition, no per-user figures, no seat minimums and no term conditions. Every path we could see from the homepage runs through a demo request or a trial download, so a buyer cannot compute an annual cost from these pages. 1 3 10

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

0 of 6 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.

Hosting location Not determined — uncited Report an error
Hosting options Not determined ⚠ unverified — 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 — uncited Report an error

Questions about Securden Password Vault for Enterprises

Is Securden Password Vault for Enterprises European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Securden Password Vault for Enterprises is based.

Where does Securden Password Vault for Enterprises store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

Does Securden Password Vault for Enterprises have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 3 Nov 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Securden Password Vault for Enterprises?

As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Password Depot (3.5/5), Bitwarden (3.5/5) and Proton Pass (3.5/5) highest among the other 23 Password Management 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 Password Depot (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Securden Password Vault for Enterprises alternatives.

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 Securden Password Vault for Enterprises? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (12)

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

  1. 1 Vendor page securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Privacy policy — found from the homepage www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Self-hosting / on-premises installation docs — found from the homepage www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Encryption model & independent audits — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Sharing, roles & recovery — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Sharing, roles & recovery — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  7. 7 SSO, directory sync & provisioning — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  8. 8 SSO, directory sync & provisioning — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Audit logs, policies & reporting — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Audit logs, policies & reporting — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Hosting choice, offline access & export — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Hosting choice, offline access & export — found from sitemap www.securden.com Checked 3 Nov 2026 Details →