# SpamScanner vs Egress: privacy compared

| Criterion | SpamScanner | Egress |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Grade | B (80/100) | F (16/100) |
| Jurisdiction | Unknown | United Kingdom (Five Eyes) |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| No trackers or telemetry | Yes | No |
| No ads or data sales | Yes | Partial |
| Independent audit | No | No |
| Transparency report | Not applicable | No |
| Tells users about requests | Not applicable | No |
| TLS configuration | Not applicable | Partial |
| Security headers | Not applicable | Partial |
| 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.

**Egress.** Egress scores 16 out of 100 (grade F) on the spam and virus filtering criteria. It partly meets no ads or data sales, TLS configuration and security headers. It does not meet open source, no trackers or telemetry, independent audit, transparency report and tells users about requests. It is based in the United Kingdom: Five Eyes member; GDPR-style data protection law; CLOUD Act data access agreement with the US. Automated tests: SSL Labs grade A- and Mozilla HTTP Observatory grade B.

Source: https://privacyratings.com/compare/spam-filters/spamscanner-vs-egress/