Self-hosted
- Fair 5.0
- Easy 3.0
- Secure 3.7
FES Scores 9
| Pillar | Criterion | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Easy | Day-one UX Can non-technical staff use it without a project? | 3 | Good enough for staff after a short intro; not Gmail-simple. Source |
| Easy | Operate Admin burden, updates, backups and language coverage. | 2 | Updates, backups and apps are a real operations load. Source |
| Easy | Integrate SSO, mail/CalDAV, APIs and common NGO connectors. | 4 | OIDC, WebDAV, Collabora, mail and many NGO connectors. Source |
| Fair | Lock-in / exit Can you leave with your data in open formats, at known cost? | 5 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): self-host + open-source path supports exit with your data. Source |
| Fair | Sovereignty EU legal entity, EU hosting, and exposure to extra-EU lawful access? | 5 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): EU vendor software; you choose EU infrastructure when self-hosting. Source |
| Fair | Openness Open source or open standards? Are independent implementations possible? | 5 | Rule baseline (rubric_v1): license classified as open-source family. Source |
| Secure | IT security Authentication, encryption, patch cadence and independent audit. | 4 | Security is as good as your patching and hardening. Source |
| Secure | User security 2FA, roles, phishing resistance and safe defaults. | 3 | 2FA and sharing warnings exist; defaults need care. Source |
| Secure | Personal data GDPR fit: DPA, residency, sub-processors and Schrems II posture. | 4 | No US SaaS sub-processor if you host in the EU and read the apps list. Source |
Indicative scores from public information — how we score.