vs email intel
Email risk that feeds the decision
Standalone email validation catches disposable domains. AbuseGraph treats email as one facet of an account decision — alongside device, session, velocity, and linked accounts — so you are not stitching three vendors for one signup.
Where AbuseGraph wins
Email inside the verdict
Mailbox signals contribute to score and reasons — not a separate boolean you reinterpret.
Standalone email when you need it
Call email intel alone, or bind it through collect→check for a full decision.
Graph beyond the inbox
Same email patterns that look fine alone may link to known abuse clusters.
One bill for auth risk
Checks meter the decision path — not a pile of micro-vendors.
| AbuseGraph | Typical email risk / intel tools | |
|---|---|---|
| Output | Email facet + full verdict | Valid / disposable / score |
| Device + session | Same check | Out of scope |
| Lists / rules | Block domains in policy | Allowlists only sometimes |
| Linked accounts | Yes | No |
When specialists still win
Validation-only workflows
If you only need syntax / deliverability / disposable checks in a form, a focused email API can be enough.
FAQ
Can I call email intel without a full check?
Yes — standalone email scoring is supported. For signup/login, prefer session collect → check so signals stay bound.
Do you sell email as a separate SKU?
No. It is part of the account-protection product and Free/Pro/Scale metering.