Samsung vs Ente
Based on our analysis, Ente is the more privacy-respecting choice overall.
BACK →| Category | Samsung | Ente |
|---|---|---|
| Overall | D · 39/100 | A · 91/100 |
| What they collect | Concern (25) | Positive (92) |
| Who they share it with | Concern (32) | Positive (86) |
| What you can do | Mixed (50) | Positive (88) |
| What they promise | Mixed (45) | Positive (89) |
Samsung's data appetite is unusually broad for a hardware maker: voice recordings stored on servers with potential third-party retention, keyboard input logging via Predictive Text synced across devices, and persistent hardware identifiers that survive ad-ID resets. The company explicitly acknowledges that sharing with business partners may constitute a data sale under US law (CCPA). Full GDPR-grade rights are reserved for EEA/UK/Swiss residents; everyone else gets basic access and deletion with no response-time commitments. Retention timelines are vague and there are no named security certifications or breach notification windows.
View full analysis →Ente is an end-to-end encrypted photo and file storage service where only you hold the decryption keys — the company genuinely cannot read your files even if ordered to; no cookies, no usage analytics, biometric processing happens on-device, and all 19 third-party providers are named; the main caveats are US/Delaware incorporation, PostHog analytics on the website, and some US-based storage and email infrastructure.
View full analysis →