# SpamScanner vs Abnormal Inbound Email Security: privacy compared

| Criterion | SpamScanner | Abnormal Inbound Email Security |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Grade | B (80/100) | F (36/100) |
| Jurisdiction | Unknown | United States (Five Eyes) |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| No trackers or telemetry | Yes | No |
| No ads or data sales | Yes | Partial |
| Independent audit | No | Partial |
| Transparency report | Not applicable | Partial |
| Tells users about requests | Not applicable | Yes |
| TLS configuration | Not applicable | Not tested yet |
| Security headers | Not applicable | Yes |
| Modern web standards | Not applicable | Not tested yet |

**SpamScanner.** SpamScanner scores 80 out of 100 (grade B) on the spam and virus filtering criteria. It meets 3 of 4 criteria: open source, no trackers or telemetry and no ads or data sales. It does not meet independent audit.

**Abnormal Inbound Email Security.** Abnormal Inbound Email Security scores 36 out of 100 (grade F) on the spam and virus filtering criteria. It meets 2 of 7 criteria: tells users about requests and security headers. It partly meets no ads or data sales, independent audit and transparency report. It does not meet open source and no trackers or telemetry. It is based in the United States: Five Eyes member; subject to the US CLOUD Act. Automated tests: Mozilla HTTP Observatory grade A+.

Source: https://privacyratings.com/compare/spam-filters/spamscanner-vs-abnormal-inbound-email-security/