Comparison

Paramant vs alternatives

How Paramant compares to existing file transfer solutions on post-quantum encryption, EU jurisdiction, burn-on-read, audit trail, and self-hosting capability.

Legend: Yes / supported ~ Partial / limited No / not supported
Feature Paramant Tresorit WeTransfer SFTP / SCP Q*Bird NXP
Post-quantum encryption ML-KEM-768 / equivalent ML-KEM-768 + ECDH P-256 hybrid (FIPS 203) AES-256 only, no PQC TLS only, no E2E RSA / ECDSA, no PQC ~Hardware QKD — network layer, not file-level ~PQC chip-level; no file relay product
EU jurisdiction No US CLOUD Act exposure Hetzner Frankfurt DE — no US sub-processors ~EU servers available but US-HQ (CLOUD Act risk) US company (Amsterdam offices, US parent) Self-hosted — jurisdiction depends on operator Dutch company, hardware only ~Global — depends on deployment region
Burn-on-read File destroyed after first download Default — ciphertext in RAM, destroyed on first read Storage-based; files persist until manually deleted Files persist for 7–365 days Files persist on server; manual deletion required Network relay, not file storage/transfer Chip / crypto primitive — not a file relay
Zero persistent storage No bytes written to disk RAM-only by default; optional disk for resilience Cloud storage is the product — always persisted Files stored in cloud until expiry Files written to server disk N/A — not a file relay N/A — not a file relay
Tamper-evident audit log Merkle tree / cryptographic proof Merkle CT log — SHA-256 leaf hashes, append-only ~Activity log — mutable, not cryptographic ~Email notification only — no cryptographic proof Server logs only — mutable, no delivery proof N/A — network layer QKD N/A — crypto chip
Self-hostable Full control, your infrastructure Docker Compose — deploy in 60s on any VPS SaaS only — no self-hosted option SaaS only By definition — you run the server Hardware appliance — not software-deployable Chip integration — not a deployable relay
Open source Auditable codebase BUSL-1.1 — full source on GitHub Proprietary — client SDK only Proprietary OpenSSH is open source Proprietary hardware / firmware ~Reference designs available; production firmware proprietary
NIS2 / NEN 7510 ready Compliance documentation NIS2 · NEN 7510 · IEC 62443 · DORA — docs available ~ISO 27001 certified; NEN 7510 not specifically No specific NIS2/NEN 7510 documentation Protocol only — compliance is operator responsibility ~IEC 62443 alignment (OT focus) ~Common Criteria certified chips
Available today Production-ready 5 live relay sectors, public Production SaaS Production SaaS Mature protocol ~Limited availability — hardware pilots Chips available; no file relay product
Pricing Entry point FreeCommunity Edition — self-hosted, ≤5 users
Professional: €149/mo · Enterprise: custom
€10/user/moBusiness plans from €10/user/mo Free / €12/moPro €12/mo — no E2E, no PQC FreeSelf-managed server costs only HardwareHardware appliance pricing — on request Chip licensingVolume chip licensing — not a relay product

Why the alternatives fall short for regulated sectors

Each alternative solves a different problem. None of them address the full stack required by NEN 7510, NIS2, or IEC 62443 for file-level data in transit.

Tresorit

Storage, not relay

Tresorit is a cloud storage product with E2E encryption. Files persist until manually deleted — there is no burn-on-read. It is a US-headquartered company, which creates CLOUD Act exposure regardless of EU server location. No post-quantum encryption. No Merkle audit log.

WeTransfer

No encryption at all

WeTransfer encrypts the transport (TLS) but has no end-to-end encryption. Files are stored in plaintext on WeTransfer servers. A US company. Files persist for 7–365 days. No audit trail. No PQC. Not compliant with GDPR Art. 32 for sensitive data.

SFTP / SCP

Channel encryption only

SFTP encrypts the channel with SSH (RSA/ECDSA), not the file. The server operator has full access to all files. Files are written to disk and persist indefinitely. Server logs are mutable — no cryptographic delivery proof. No PQC support in production deployments. Jurisdiction depends entirely on where you run the server.

Q*Bird

Network QKD, not file relay

Q*Bird builds QKD hardware for securing network links — a different problem. QKD requires physical fibre between sites, is not yet at scale, and does not address file-level encryption, burn-on-read, or audit trails. Not generally available; hardware pilots only as of 2026.

NXP

Chip-level crypto — not a relay

NXP produces cryptographic hardware (Secure Elements, HSMs, PQC-ready microcontrollers). This is enabling technology for building PQC applications, not a file relay product. NXP chips could be used inside a relay implementation, but NXP itself does not offer a competing service.

Start with the free Community Edition

Deploy in 60 seconds. Full source code. All encryption features. No account required.