Skip to main content
InviziPoll
Get Started
InviziPoll Reviews

Proof-first posture, not fabricated ratings

InviziPoll is engineered so individual poll answers stay ciphertext on our servers. That architectural story matters more than synthetic star widgets, but we know procurement teams still look for primary-source proof they can verify independently.

See the verifiable sourcesRead the threat model

encrypted in the browser · none identifiableEveryone talks. No one is singled out.

Verifiable artifacts manifest

Illustrative list of verifiable primary-source artifacts: four live documents, one Tier-1 directory listing underway, and a policy row excluding fabricated testimonials.

BLUF: Bottom line up front

What we publish, and what we refuse to fake

We don't synthesize testimonials or run a star widget we control on this marketing site. Instead we point buyers at artifacts they can verify independently, and at Tier-1 directories where verified buyers publish structured reviews tied to real deployments. The distinction is the whole point of a proof-first posture.

What we publish

  • Primary-source security & encryption artifacts
  • Structured reviews from verified buyers on Tier-1 directories
  • Neutral, side-by-side vendor comparisons

What we refuse to fake

  • Invented testimonials or named quotes
  • A star-rating widget we score ourselves
  • Paid-for ratings or incentivized reviews

How we are building public proof

Three routes to external validation

Each one is verifiable without taking our word for it. That's the bar for anything we'd call proof.

01

Independent directories

Tier-1 listings on G2, Capterra, and TrustRadius are underway, so verified buyers can publish structured reviews tied to real deployments, not marketing copy we wrote ourselves.

Underway
02

Security artifacts

Share Security & Trust, our Anonymity guarantees, and the Privacy Policy with your risk reviewers. These documents anchor every factual claim we make.

Live now
03

Honest comparisons

Neutral vendor pages live under Alternatives, so you can map InviziPoll against tools your teams already pay for, with strengths and trade-offs stated plainly.

Live now

Questions

What buyers ask about reviews

The honest answers, and the URLs to pair with your own questionnaire.

What do InviziPoll reviews say?

We do not synthesize testimonials on this marketing site. Buyers should rely on Tier-1 software directories as they launch, plus primary-source artifacts: Security & Trust (/security), docs on encryption, and this page's FAQs. Procurement teams pairing those URLs with their own questionnaires get the factual baseline, without a fabricated rating in the middle.

Why aren't there testimonials on this page?

Because we can't make them verifiable. A quote we write and attribute ourselves proves nothing about how the product behaves. We'd rather send you to sources you can check independently, including the architecture, the docs, and reviews published by verified buyers on directories we don't control.

Where can I find third-party reviews?

Tier-1 directory listings on G2, Capterra, and TrustRadius are underway. When live, they'll carry structured reviews from verified buyers tied to real deployments. Until then, the primary-source artifacts in the manifest above are the strongest evidence available, and they don't depend on a directory's launch schedule.

What can I hand my security or procurement team?

Send them four URLs: Security & Trust, the encryption docs, Anonymity guarantees, and the Privacy Policy. Together they cover the threat model, key custody, the ciphertext boundary, and our telemetry posture: the factual baseline a review questionnaire is meant to confirm.

How is this different from a star rating?

A star rating is a summary you have to trust. A primary-source artifact is a claim you can independently verify. We'd rather be judged on the second, and let genuine buyer reviews accumulate where we can't edit them.

Verify for yourself

The four URLs to check our claims against

Pair these with your questionnaire. They anchor everything on this page.

Security & TrustThreat model, key custody, and breach-impact facts for vendor assessments./securityRead moreEncryption docsML-KEM-768 envelopes, ML-DSA-65 signatures, and client-side decryption boundaries./docs/docs-encryption-model-overviewRead moreAnonymityCiphertext-only storage and what operators cannot read from poll responses./trust/anonymityRead moreAlternativesNeutral vendor comparisons against tools your teams already pay for./alternativesRead more

Evaluate the architecture, not the adjective.

Pair the artifacts on this page with your own questionnaire, or start a trial and test the ciphertext boundary yourself.