Client-side protection · RankedSource Defense
Source Defense is a client-side protection product that controls third-party scripts through policy-based rules · sourcedefense.com ↗
Read the same way at every company size.
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is first at 19%.
cside is first at 18%. 1 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
Feroot Security is first at 16%.
Why models recommend it
“Source Defense is the strongest default choice”Perplexity Sonar · Direct question · first choice
“Best for organizations that rely heavily on tag managers and need to control the blast radius of third‑party scripts”MiniMax M2.5 · Comparative question · alternative
“Choose Source Defense when enforcing fine-grained permissions for third-party scripts matters most.”Perplexity Sonar · Comparative question · alternative
“Choose a sandboxing model like Source Defense to isolate third-party scripts”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Comparative question · alternative
What gives them pause
“Tools that rely solely on client-side JavaScript agents or sandboxing (such as those from vendors like JScrambler, SourceDefense, Reflectiz, and Human Security) are often criticized.”Mistral Small · Negative question · warning
“"such as JavaScript sandboxing agents (e.g., from vendors like JScrambler, SourceDefense/Reflectiz, Human Security)" ... 7 of 14 models · 3 hard negative”Muse Glimmer 30B · Negative question · warning
“Vendors like SourceDefense, JScrambler, Reflectiz (in some implementations), Human Security, and otto-js have been criticized”Kimi K2 · Negative question · warning
“similar tools from Source Defense or others ... they are ineffective against sophisticated attacks”Grok 4.20 · Negative question · warning
Also on the shortlist
The products named in the same answers as Source Defense, over the 59 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 47 | 1 | View → | |
| 44 | 6 | Compare → | |
| 37 | 1 | View → | |
| 32 | 7 | Compare → | |
| 30 | 5 | View → | |
| 30 | 1 | View → | |
| 26 | 10 | Compare → | |
| 24 | 0 | Compare → | |
| 22 | 3 | Compare → | |
| 9 | 0 | View → |
What the models named instead of Source Defense →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
At a glance
Stated on Source Defense's own site, not checked by Gane.
- For
- Merchants, merchant acquirers, payment service providers, ecommerce platform providers
- Free plan or trial
- Free Trial
- Certifications
- PCI DSS, HIPAA, CCPA, GDPR, SOC 2
How this is measured
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Sources returned with these answers
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted. These counts come from 57 of the 59 answers that named Source Defense and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
207 of the 243 domain citations in answers naming Source Defense came from a third party's page. Thirty-six were to the publisher's own pages (the Gane Index), which the models cite like any other source; they are not counted as a third party.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
By model
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
What it publishes
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-11 to 2026-10 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 279 | 18 | 2026-09-24 | Client-side protection, CDN | |
| Glossary or explainer | 76 | 1 | 2026-08-07 | WAF, ASM | |
| Webinar or virtual event | 52 | 5 | 2026-08-19 | ||
| News or press | 46 | 0 | 2023-06-06 | ||
| Report or ebook | 34 | 14 | 2026-08-14 | ||
| Case study | 7 | 4 | 2026-08-11 | ||
| Podcast or video | 7 | 0 | 2025-11-13 | ||
| Comparison | 5 | 3 | 2026-08-11 | ||
| Conference or event | 2 | 0 | 2022-06-07 |
Most recent
- 2026-09-24Two smart contracts reveal two ways etherhiding sustains attacks blog
- 2026-09-223000 site clickfix campaign built for rapid domain rotation blog
- 2026-09-15Hipaa enforcement is increasing why third party scripts are the next big target blog
- 2026-09-15Third magecart attack returns to major u s brand stores blog
- 2026-09-10What psps arent telling merchants about client side risk blog
- 2026-09-08A holistic look at eskimming from formjacking to full funnel manipulation blog
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page sourcedefense.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read October 5, 2026.