Similar services:

All services in the two tables above have credibility issues.

Deseat.me and Safe Shepherd are apparently the only services with enough sense to not advertize ties to Facebook and Twitter on their landing page. OTOH, they also neglect to make use of federated networks like Mastodon, which would be useful considering support@deseat.me goes through Amazon and Safe Shepherd gives a Gmail address. Unless you’re willing to transmit to a Gmail address, Safe Shepherd is nearly out of reach, and they most need to be reachable considering they want users to register before knowing what the price will be.

Privacyduck

Privacyduck is the only service with enough sense to not use a dodgy tech giant for web hosting, although sadly they choose Gmail for their email provider (for support@privacyduck.com).

The name Privacyduck is an issue. Are they affiliated with DuckDuckGo, or are they only trying to appear to be? Either they are disingenuous or they are linked to a very untrustworthy search engine.

shortcomings (identified from the Privacyduck guide)

• No password protection: “we will never display your information or require you to enter a password to access your data” – if not password protected, then how is the data protected?
• Helps privacy adversaries: in “Port 3” they remove outdated info and dead links from search engines. No thanks. Maybe I don’t want them improving Google results. When you clean up the useless results, the accurate results with sensitive info become more exposed with higher rankings. Google is our adversary who profits from surveillance capitalism. In fact I might rather pay them to pollute Google’s data to lower its value. Google offers the free service to cleanup misinfo precisely because it adds value to their dataset. Data is worth more than oil. Now consider what Europeans get: in the GDPR jurisdiction, Google gives the exclusive option to remove information about Europeans, even if accurate and current. Privacyduck doesn’t mention this, so they are apparently not considering European customers.
• Pays ransom?: The VIP service removes data from ~100 or so non-FCRA compliant sites but they do not explain how they do this. We have to assume Privacyduck has a backroom deal with these more hardcore privacy abusers. They likely pay those sites a fee to remove a record. If that’s the case, it would mean Privacyduck customers are financially supporting their abusers. Feeding abusers worsens the situation for everyone. This is not crazy talk considering how smear sites work. Smear sites publish negative info on people and profit from it to the full extent they can. It’s well known that cleanup sites often have a symbiotic/reciprocal relationship with smear sites, and negotiate a bulk removal deal that still yields a profit for the smear site. It’s like paying ransom.
• Inflexible service: Privacyduck is not flexible about their service. You cannot ask for a la carte service or alterations. Notice their pricing requires buying service for two people. They’re not interested in doing business with single people. (page 7 of the guide)