Scrut alternative with a built-in
consent ledger.

Consider TryTrustable instead of Scrut if you need a consent management platform (banner, tracker blocking, versioned notices and a hash-chained consent ledger) on the same control graph as your DPDP and security evidence, or governance for AI models you build. Stay with Scrut for its 70+ frameworks, larger integration library and partner ecosystem.

On framework coverage the two are close: DPDP, GDPR, SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, the NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act appear on both. The differences are consent collection, the kind of AI governance each offers, and what each states publicly about where your data is held.

Consent that runs on your site. DPDP and GDPR duties about consent are met in the product your users touch, not in a policy. TryTrustable's consent management platform resolves the applicable regime per visitor (opt-in for the EU, UK and India, opt-out with Global Privacy Control for California) blocks trackers until the visitor agrees, and writes each choice to an append-only, hash-chained ledger. Withdrawal relays pass a withdrawal on to the processors you shared the data with. The DPDP guide explains why a boolean flag does not satisfy the Act.

Governing AI you build. Scrut's shadow AI governance is aimed at AI tools staff adopt^[5]. TryTrustable's AI governance registers your own models, prompts and MCP servers and runs judge-scored evaluations, so the evidence for ISO 42001 or the EU AI Act describes the system you ship.

Residency stated as a deployment fact. Indian customer data is resident in India, and the security page says so as a property of where the infrastructure runs. Scrut states AWS as its data centre without naming the region on the pages we read^[8].

Readiness from live state. Residual risk on the risk register and framework readiness are both computed from control results, and the SDK and CI gate add evidence from inside your code.

Scrut is the better fit in several respects.

• Framework catalogue. 70+ frameworks, including FedRAMP and NIST SP 800-53^[1][2], against our 25+ regimes.
• Integrations. Scrut's homepage states 150+ integrations^[3]. If your evidence is spread across many SaaS tools, pre-built connectors matter.
• Agentic workflows and testing. Scrut markets AI agents that draft policies, collect evidence, answer questionnaires and run agent-driven penetration testing with human verification^[3].
• Shadow AI discovery. If your AI risk is staff adopting tools before review, Scrut's discovery and access restriction address that directly^[5].
• Ecosystem and maturity. Scrut states 75+ partners and customers in 65+ countries^[9]. TryTrustable is younger, and our own SOC 2 and ISO 27001 certification is in progress.

If you already run on Scrut, consent is handled elsewhere to your satisfaction, and your AI exposure is mostly third-party tools, staying with Scrut is reasonable.

You can start without leaving: Consent by TryTrustable runs next to Scrut and covers the consent gap on its own. If you later move the programme, we do not claim an automated import from Scrut.

What carries over is the work rather than the files. The controls you operate today (access reviews, encryption, logging, vendor reviews, incident response) are the same controls in any tool. In TryTrustable each one is mapped once onto a shared control library, and cross-framework mapping carries its result to every regime that asks for it, with partial coverage recorded as partial. Your policies are documents you already own, and your past audit reports remain your records.

What does not carry over is history. Evidence in TryTrustable is timestamped when it is collected, from the day an integration connects, and every framework starts empty: a requirement with no control behind it scores as not modelled, never as met. Keep what you exported from the old tool as a record of the earlier period rather than expecting it to be re-dated. Integrations take read-only scopes, so connecting them changes nothing in your environment.

For the detail behind the TryTrustable column: the full list of regimes we cover, Consent by TryTrustable, the standalone consent management platform, our DPDP Act and Rules 2025 guide and AI governance for ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act.

Comparing more than one tool? We have written the same comparison for the others: TryTrustable as a Vanta alternative and TryTrustable as a Sprinto alternative.

This page compares software, and is not legal advice about what any regulation requires of you.