CipherStash Stash vs Futurex Hardware Security Modules: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

CipherStash Stash

Startups and SMBs managing TypeScript services need CipherStash Stash because its zero-knowledge architecture means the vendor literally cannot access your secrets, plaintext, or decryption keys, even under compulsion. The cryptographic audit trail creates immutable proof of every access event, addressing both PR.AA and PR.DS in NIST CSF 2.0 simultaneously. Skip this if your team runs primarily Python or Go; the SDK strength is decidedly TypeScript-first, and retrofitting other languages adds friction that larger, language-agnostic competitors don't impose.

Futurex Hardware Security Modules

Mid-market and enterprise organizations handling payment processing or managing encryption keys across hybrid infrastructure need Futurex Hardware Security Modules because it runs payment and general-purpose cryptography on a single platform without forcing separate HSM investments. FIPS 140-2 Level 3 validation plus PCI HSM approval covers both compliance boxes, and the 50,000 transaction-per-second capacity on Excrypt SSP Enterprise v.2 means you won't hit throughput walls as you scale. Skip this if your team lacks in-house HSM expertise or you're looking for a managed service; Futurex requires deployment competency and doesn't abstract away the operational complexity of key lifecycle management.