Vendor evidence profile

OneTrust: what the public record shows

nexalign keeps a continuously updated evidence record on OneTrust for governance, risk and compliance decisions: 9 items from 3 kinds of source, covering June 2025 to July 2026. Every item on this page links to the source it came from, carrying the date that source states and saying so plainly where it states none.

In one line

This record holds 1 advisory attributed to OneTrust products across 9 evidence items in total, none of them in the CISA catalogue of known exploited vulnerabilities. 100 percent of the record comes from sources OneTrust cannot edit. Whether OneTrust suits your decision is not on this page: that depends on your criteria, your compliance scope and your shortlist, and this record does not know them.

Evidence items

9

in this record

Attributed advisories

1

none known exploited

Authoritative share

22%

government registers

Last checked

Jul 18, 2026

sources re-queried

How independent is this record

Sources are not equal. A vendor can rewrite its own website overnight and optimise it for whatever a language model is likely to quote. It cannot edit a government vulnerability register or a years-old discussion thread. Every item in this record is classified by how much the vendor could influence it, and the score below is the weighted result.

Independence of this record

Objectivity score 69/100

Authoritative
2 items, 22 percent
Independent
7 items, 78 percent
Vendor-controlled
0 items, 0 percent

100 percent of this record comes from sources OneTrust does not control. The remainder is OneTrust's own material and is marked as such wherever it appears.

Where this record comes from

These are the sources that contributed to the OneTrust record, with the body that operates each one. No rating, score or ranking is taken from anywhere, and no vendor pays to appear in this index or to change what it says.

SourceOperated byClassificationItemsLatest
European Vulnerability DatabaseENISA, European UnionAuthoritative1Jun 25, 2025
National Vulnerability DatabaseNIST, United States Department of CommerceAuthoritative1Jun 25, 2025
Analyst, review and reference sourcesRecognised analysts, review marketplaces and technology pressIndependent7Jul 03, 2026

Documented vulnerabilities

Vulnerability registers are searched by keyword, so an advisory about a different product often mentions OneTrust in passing. An entry is only listed here when a structural signal ties it to a product of OneTrust: an advisory reference on the vendor's own domain, OneTrust as the assigning authority, or the affected product list naming it. 1 record passed that test.

  • CVE-2024-57708mediumCVSS 5.7Jun 25, 2025

    An issue in OneTrust SDK v.6.33.0 allows a local attacker to cause a denial of service via the Object.setPrototypeOf, __proto__, and Object.assign components.

What practitioners report

Public threads in which engineers and administrators discuss running this product. Only threads naming OneTrust in their own title are listed, so a discussion about someone else's incident cannot end up under this vendor. Not curated for sentiment: 0 threads in the record, most recent first.

Nothing on record from this kind of source.

Independent coverage

Recognised analysts, review marketplaces and neutral technology press that name OneTrust. This section runs on a fixed list of such outlets rather than on whatever a web search returns for the company name, because that search is dominated by sales-intelligence profiles and directory listings which say nothing about the product. Social networks and press-release wires are excluded outright.

  • capterra.comdate not recordedIndependent

    OneTrust Reviews 2026. Verified Reviews, Pros & Cons | Capterra

    capterra.com

  • gartner.comdate not recordedIndependent

    OneTrust Reviews, Ratings & Features 2026 | Gartner Peer Insights

    gartner.com

  • gartner.comdate not recordedIndependent

    OneTrust Tech Risk & Compliance Reviews & Ratings 2026 | Gartner Peer Insights

    gartner.com

  • peerspot.comdate not recordedIndependent

    What is your primary use case for OneTrust GRC?

    peerspot.com

  • gartner.comdate not recordedIndependent

    Top OneTrust Competitors & Alternatives 2026 | Gartner Peer Insights - IT Risk Management

    gartner.com

What OneTrust publishes about itself

The vendor's own documentation, kept separate from everything above and marked as vendor-controlled. It is useful, and it is a claim until an independent source confirms it.

Nothing on record from this kind of source.

What this record cannot tell you

A record is only trustworthy if it is explicit about its holes. These are the ones in the OneTrust record right now.

  • No public practitioner discussion naming OneTrust was found in the indexed threads. Operational experience with this product is not represented in this record.

  • Pricing, contract terms, notice periods and support commitments are not part of any public register. They come from the vendor and belong in a negotiation record.

  • Certification status such as ISO 27001, SOC 2 or BSI C5 has to be checked against the current certificate and its stated scope. A valid certificate can still exclude the product being bought.

Whether OneTrust is the right choice is not on this page

A record of what is true about a vendor is one half of a decision. The other half is your context: which criteria matter, how heavily each one weighs, what is a hard no, and who has to sign the result off. No public page can know that, and any page that claims to rank vendors for you is guessing at it.

Typical criteria for this category

Needs your case
  • NIS2 Readinessweight
  • DORA Complianceweight
  • GDPR Data Protectionweight
  • Audit Trail & Evidence Collectionweight
  • Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)weight

Criteria shown as examples for governance, risk and compliance. Weighting and fit are properties of your decision, not of the vendor, so they are not published here.

What DecisionOS adds on top of this record

  • The vendor scored against your criteria with your weighting, not against a generic ranking
  • A dealbreaker check against your hard constraints: data residency, contract terms, existing stack
  • A side-by-side view of the alternatives on your shortlist, built from this same evidence pool
  • This evidence mapped onto your compliance scope: NIS2, DORA, ISO 27001, SOC 2
  • A decision memo your board can read, with the trade-offs and the reasoning on the record

Questions this page answers

Is OneTrust a safe choice?

The public record holds 1 advisories attributed to OneTrust products and 9 evidence items in total. None of them appears in the CISA catalogue of known exploited vulnerabilities. Whether that is acceptable depends on your risk appetite, your compliance scope and the alternatives on your shortlist, none of which a public page can know. This page reports the record; it does not rate the vendor.

Where does the OneTrust data on this page come from?

From 3 kinds of source: European Vulnerability Database, operated by ENISA, European Union; National Vulnerability Database, operated by NIST, United States Department of Commerce; Analyst, review and reference sources, operated by Recognised analysts, review marketplaces and technology press. Every item carries its source URL and, where the source states one, its date.

Does OneTrust pay to appear in this index?

No. There is no paid placement, no sponsored profile and no way for a vendor to change what the record says. Vendors are listed because their category comes up in enterprise technology decisions. Corrections to a specific entry can be sent to [email protected] and are checked against the source.

How much of the OneTrust record is the vendor's own material?

0 percent. The remaining 100 percent comes from sources OneTrust does not control. Vendor-published material stays in the record and is labelled as vendor-controlled rather than counted as independent confirmation.

Why does this page not say whether OneTrust is better than the alternatives?

Because better only exists relative to a decision. Which criteria matter, how heavily each one weighs and what counts as a dealbreaker are properties of the buyer, not of the vendor. DecisionOS takes this same evidence pool and scores it against the criteria of an actual decision, which is where a comparison becomes meaningful.

How this record is built

Sources are queried on a schedule, not on request. Findings are stored with the source URL, the event date and a content hash, so the same item is never counted twice and every statement stays traceable to where it came from.

Nothing on this page is written by a language model. Counts are counts, dates are the dates the sources carry, and titles are the sources' own wording. Where a section is empty, that is a finding in itself and is stated as one.

Corrections are welcome. If an entry is wrong or an attribution is off, write to [email protected] and it gets checked against the source.

Citing this page

nexalign GmbH, OneTrust: what the public record shows, nexalign vendor evidence index, Jul 18, 2026. Available at nexalign.io/vendors/onetrust.

The whole field is on one page: every governance, risk and compliance vendor with a published record, with the size of each.

Turn this record into a decision you can defend

DecisionOS takes the same evidence pool this page is built from, weighs it against the criteria of your actual decision, and produces a memo that holds up in front of a board and an auditor.

OneTrust: vulnerabilities, sources and open questions | DecisionOS by nexalign