Every security tool comparison site you've ever used is lying to you.
Not through direct falsehood. Through omission, emphasis, and the subtle corruption that comes from taking vendor money. Gartner takes consulting fees from the companies they rank. G2 and TrustRadius run vendor ads and sponsored placements. The "independent" analysts publish reports funded by the vendors being evaluated.
The result: You're making six-figure security decisions based on marketing disguised as research.
I built North because I got tired of watching smart security teams choose tools based on whoever had the biggest conference presence or the slickest sales demo. I watched a Fortune 500 company select a SIEM that their own security engineers knew was inferior because the vendor's "analyst positioning" looked better in board presentations.
The security tool comparison industry is broken by design. North exists to fix it.
Why Every Comparison Site Fails
The fundamental problem isn't execution. It's incentives.
The Vendor Money Problem
Traditional comparison platforms make money from vendors. This corrupts everything:
- Gartner and Forrester: Take consulting fees from the companies they evaluate. The rankings reflect who pays, not what works.
- G2 and TrustRadius: Run vendor ads, offer "premium placements," and let vendors respond to reviews. The reviews become marketing channels.
- Analyst Reports: Funded by vendors who want favorable positioning. The conclusions are predetermined.
You can't take vendor money and provide unbiased analysis. It's structurally impossible. North refuses vendor money entirely.
The Real-World Gap
Most comparison sites list features. Features are meaningless. What matters is:
- Does this tool actually work in production with your infrastructure?
- What does implementation really cost (not the list price)?
- How good is vendor support when things break at 2 AM?
- What are the hidden limitations the sales team didn't mention?
The only way to get this information is from security professionals who've actually implemented these tools. Not from vendors. Not from analysts. From practitioners.
What North Actually Does Differently
Real Implementation Data, Not Feature Lists
Feature checklists are useless. Every vendor claims to do everything. North focuses on what actually matters:
- Implementation Complexity: How long does deployment really take? What breaks during integration?
- Total Cost of Ownership: The real number, not the list price. Training, maintenance, integration, hidden fees.
- Operational Impact: Does this tool create more work for your team or less?
- Vendor Reality Check: What happens when you need support at 2 AM? How responsive are they to feature requests?
Practitioner-Verified Information
Every insight on North comes from security professionals who've actually implemented these tools. Not from vendor marketing. Not from analysts who've never run a SOC. From people who've done the work and can tell you what's real.
This means:
- Implementation war stories with actual timelines and challenges
- Integration gotchas the sales team never mentioned
- Honest assessments of vendor support quality
- Real cost data from real deployments
The Uncomfortable Truth About Security Tool Selection
Most organizations choose security tools based on:
- Conference presence. Whoever had the biggest booth at RSA.
- Analyst positioning. Whoever paid Gartner the most.
- Sales relationships. Whoever took the CISO to the best dinner.
- Inertia. Whatever the previous team already had in place.
This is insane. These are six and seven-figure decisions that determine whether your organization can actually defend itself, and most companies make them based on marketing effectiveness rather than technical merit.
North exists because this status quo is indefensible. Security professionals deserve better information. Organizations deserve better outcomes. The vendor-dominated comparison ecosystem serves everyone except the people actually trying to protect their organizations.
Who This Threatens
Building an unbiased security tool comparison platform threatens a lot of entrenched interests:
- Analyst firms that make billions from vendor consulting fees
- Comparison sites that monetize through sponsored placements
- Vendors who've built their market position on marketing, not merit
- Sales teams who rely on information asymmetry to close deals
They won't be happy about North. Some will try to discredit us. Some will try to buy us. Some will try to copy us (while taking vendor money on the side).
That's fine. The security professionals who finally have access to unbiased information will know the difference.
The Industry Won't Fix Itself
The security tool comparison industry has no incentive to change. Vendors will keep paying for favorable positioning. Analysts will keep accepting consulting fees. Comparison sites will keep running sponsored content.
North is built on a simple premise: security professionals deserve unbiased information, and the only way to get it is to refuse vendor money entirely.
No sponsored placements. No vendor consulting fees. No "premium listings." Just honest information from people who've actually implemented these tools.
The incumbent players won't like this. They'll question our methodology, our sustainability, our credibility. That's fine. The security teams making better decisions because they finally have access to unbiased information will be all the validation we need.
If you're tired of making security decisions based on whoever had the biggest marketing budget, try North. The comparison industry is broken. We're building the alternative.