whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Video Conferencing

Nextcloud Talk

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 Nextcloud GmbH · nextcloud.com

Compare with Jitsi Meet → 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 Security Officer

Weighted verdict

Wants to know what the vendor can see, and reads "encrypted" as a question rather than an answer. Asks which meetings get end-to-end encryption, what stops working when they do, who holds the keys, and who can walk into a meeting with a link.

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

Scored by The Security Officer

The meeting itself

How this is scored

Whether the call works: participant capacity, video and audio quality under load, screen sharing, breakout rooms, moderation, and what happens on a bad connection.

0 — Small meetings only, no screen sharing worth the name, no moderation controls, and the call degrades without telling anyone.

3 — Standard meetings with screen sharing and mute-all, but low participant limits, no breakout rooms and no bandwidth adaptation stated.

5 — Meetings at the scale most teams need with screen sharing, breakout rooms, host moderation, and documented behaviour on constrained connections.

8 — Large meetings and webinars with published capacity limits, per-participant moderation and waiting rooms, layout control, simulcast or adaptive bitrate stated, and reliable behaviour on mobile networks.

10 — Scale and control are engineering claims the vendor stands behind: capacity published per plan and per region, selective forwarding with adaptive quality documented, live streaming, hardware-room support, and diagnostics an admin can read after a bad call.

Report an error

The Security Officer

Breakout rooms and webinars-with-lobby exist, and published scaling is candid — 6-10 participants for a private setup, thousands only at enterprise — but the evidence is silent on screen sharing, mute-all or any host moderation, and says nothing about behaviour on a constrained connection beyond admitting video caps you at 20. Between the 3 and 5 anchors: breakout rooms without the moderation and screen-sharing basics that rubric level 5 demands. 1

Report an error

Encryption & meeting access

How this is scored

What is actually encrypted and against whom, plus who can get into a meeting. Judged on documented mechanism rather than on the word "encrypted".

0 — Transport encryption only, undocumented; meetings joinable by anyone with a link and no lobby.

3 — TLS in transit and encryption at rest, with the vendor holding all keys; access control is a passcode.

5 — The above plus a lobby or waiting room, host-controlled admission, per-meeting passcodes, and a clear statement that the vendor can technically access media.

8 — Optional end-to-end encryption for meetings with the trade-offs named (which features stop working), documented key handling, SSO-gated joining, and per-meeting access policies.

10 — End-to-end encryption available without surrendering the product — its cryptography documented or open source, key management explained, identity verification for participants, and the vendor stating plainly what it can and cannot see.

Report an error

The Security Officer

"Multi-layered encryption" is a marketing phrase, not a mechanism: no end-to-end statement for meetings, no key handling, and signaling can run through a High Performance Backend hosted by unnamed partners. The only concrete cryptography I can verify is push notifications encrypted and re-signed by the vendor's proxy, with a lobby available only for webinars that buy the HPB. Nothing here tells me what the server operator or the hosted HPB can see of the media. 1 3

Report an error

Reach & accessibility

How this is scored

Whether everyone who needs to join can: browser without an install, dial-in, low bandwidth, guests without accounts, captions and keyboard operation.

0 — A desktop client is the only way in; guests must create an account.

3 — Browser joining exists but is degraded, guests can join by link, and there is no dial-in and no accessibility statement.

5 — Full-feature browser joining without an install, guest access by link, mobile apps, and a stated accessibility posture.

8 — Telephone dial-in with numbers listed, live captions, keyboard-navigable and screen-reader-tested interface, and documented low-bandwidth behaviour.

10 — Reach is designed for: browser parity with the client, dial-in across the regions the customer operates in, live captions and translation, a published accessibility conformance report, and a usable experience on a poor mobile connection.

Report an error

The Security Officer

Web, desktop and mobile are covered, live transcription with translation exists, and there is a real telephone path — but dial-in requires the separately deployed HPB and no numbers or rates are listed. There is no accessibility statement, no keyboard or screen-reader evidence, and no documented low-bandwidth behaviour anywhere in the evidence; silence here is information. 1 4

Report an error

Recordings, retention & admin control

How this is scored

A recording is personal data about everyone in the room. Who may record, who is told, where it is stored, how long it lives, and what the works council can switch off.

0 — Anyone can record, storage location unstated, no retention rule, no admin policy.

3 — Host-only recording with a notification, but storage region unstated, retention manual, and no organisation-wide policy control.

5 — Admin policy over who may record, participant notification and consent prompt, stated storage region, and manual deletion that works.

8 — Automatic retention and deletion per policy, recordings encrypted at rest with access logged, transcription handled with its own retention rule, and attendance or analytics features that can be switched off for co-determination.

10 — Built for a works agreement: every recording, transcript and analytics feature independently switchable and documented, retention executed and evidenced, an audit trail of who accessed which recording, and no participant-level behavioural scoring at all.

Report an error

The Security Officer

There is a recording-consent prompt in meetings and self-hosting puts the recording on infrastructure the customer controls, which is a decent starting point. But the evidence evidences no admin policy over who may record, no retention or deletion rule for recordings or the AI transcripts, and no access logging — message expiration is a chat feature, not recording governance, and nothing here is works-council switchable. 1

Report an error

Integrations & deployment

How this is scored

Calendar, identity and the wider stack — plus, in this category, whether the product can be run on the customer's own infrastructure at all.

0 — No calendar integration, no SSO, no API; cloud-only with no alternative.

3 — One calendar integration and basic SSO, no API worth building on, cloud-only.

5 — Calendar integration for the major suites, SAML or OIDC SSO, a documented API for scheduling, and room-system support.

8 — The above plus SCIM provisioning, embedding via SDK, webhooks for meeting events, and either a self-hosted option or a documented private-cloud deployment.

10 — Deployment is the customer's choice: a genuine on-premises or private-cloud option with the same features, open protocols or open source, embeddable SDKs, and identity integration that does not require the vendor's directory.

Report an error

The Security Officer

Deployment is genuinely the customer's: fully on-premises, airgap-capable, open source, with webhook bots, a SIP bridge and a Pexip gateway for room systems and an Outlook add-in. But the evidence shows no SAML/OIDC SSO, no SCIM provisioning and no SDK — for a self-hosted stack, the absence of documented identity federation is a real gap. 1 2

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where media and metadata are processed, who the contracting entity is, which subprocessors carry the traffic. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; scored here as this buyer weighs it — which in this category is heavily.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, media routed through unstated regions, subprocessors unnamed.

3 — EU data residency for storage while media relays or metadata remain non-EU, or the contracting entity sits outside the EU.

5 — EU hosting and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — relays, analytics, support tooling, transcription — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.

8 — Media and metadata processed in the EU on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, complete subprocessor list published, any non-EU processing named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: media never leaves the EU, every subprocessor European, certification published, and an on-premises option that removes the question entirely.

Report an error

The Security Officer

The contracting entity is firmly German — Nextcloud GmbH, register HRB 227086, Stuttgart, German VAT ID — and the self-hosted/airgap model means media locality is largely the customer's own decision, which is why I score above the 5 anchor. But nothing evidences where vendor-operated pieces land: the STUN server Nextcloud itself hosts, partner-hosted HPBs with unnamed partners, and Matomo cloud for analytics; there is no product subprocessor list, so the chain is partly a black box. 1 3 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the annual invoice for their host count — including the capacity, dial-in and recording storage they actually need — from public pages alone.

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

3 — A per-host headline exists, but participant caps, dial-in minutes or recording storage are unpriced or unmentioned.

5 — Per-host prices public with billing period stated and capacity limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (webinar capacity, dial-in, storage) sits in an unpriced add-on.

8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with per-host maths, capacity limits, dial-in rates, storage allowances, minimum term and VAT treatment stated.

10 — Complete price computability: a calculator producing the annual invoice for a given host count, meeting size and recording volume, including overage and per-region dial-in.

Report an error

The Security Officer

Per-user prices are public for three tiers with volume breaks, in EUR per year net of VAT, from 100 users — better than a headline, but capacity limits per plan are absent, minimum term is unstated, and dial-in is entirely unpriced because it depends on an HPB whose hosted cost never appears. Recording storage is likewise unmentioned; the annual invoice for what a buyer actually needs is not computable from these pages. 1 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 Not determined ⚠ unverified — uncited 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.

Sources (15)

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

  1. 1 Product page nextcloud.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing nextcloud.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy nextcloud.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Imprint nextcloud.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Security / trust page nextcloud.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  6. 6 The meeting itself — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 The meeting itself — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Encryption & meeting access — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Reach & accessibility — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Recordings, retention & admin control — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  14. 14 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  15. 15 Integrations & deployment — found from sitemap help.nextcloud.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →