| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Starting Price | — | $25/mo |
| Capabilities | 6 decomposed | 15 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Scans user-provided prompts for common personally identifiable information patterns (names, email addresses, phone numbers, financial account numbers, medical record identifiers) using regex or NLP-based pattern matching, then replaces detected values with anonymized tokens (e.g., [NAME_1], [EMAIL_1]) before transmission to ChatGPT. The system maintains a local mapping table to enable optional de-anonymization of responses post-retrieval, though this mapping is not persisted across sessions by default.
Unique: Implements client-side pattern-based PII detection with local token mapping rather than relying on server-side redaction, allowing users to maintain control over sensitive data without transmitting raw PII to any external system. The masking occurs in the browser before ChatGPT API calls, creating a privacy boundary at the point of transmission.
vs alternatives: Simpler and faster than manual redaction workflows, but weaker than cryptographic encryption or differential privacy approaches because masking is deterministic and reversible, making it vulnerable to inference attacks if the token mapping is exposed.
Provides a streamlined UI that accepts raw prompts, automatically detects and masks PII in a single action, and forwards the sanitized prompt to ChatGPT without requiring users to manually identify or redact sensitive fields. The workflow includes optional review/edit steps where users can verify masked content before submission, reducing friction compared to manual copy-paste redaction.
Unique: Reduces privacy-conscious prompt submission to a single-click action with optional review, eliminating the cognitive load of manual redaction. The design prioritizes accessibility over technical depth, making privacy protection available to non-technical users without requiring regex knowledge or data classification expertise.
vs alternatives: More user-friendly than manual redaction or DIY regex-based masking scripts, but less robust than enterprise data loss prevention (DLP) tools because it lacks machine learning-based context understanding and has no organizational policy enforcement.
Maintains an in-memory mapping table during a browser session that tracks the relationship between original PII values and their anonymized tokens (e.g., {[NAME_1]: 'John Smith', [EMAIL_1]: 'john@example.com'}). After receiving ChatGPT's response, users can optionally trigger de-anonymization to replace tokens back with original values, restoring readability without re-exposing data to OpenAI. The mapping is not persisted across sessions or backed up, requiring users to maintain their own records if long-term reference is needed.
Unique: Implements client-side, session-scoped token mapping that allows users to maintain a local reference to original values without persisting sensitive data to any server. This design trades durability for privacy — the mapping exists only in browser memory and is automatically discarded on session end, preventing long-term data leakage through stored mappings.
vs alternatives: More privacy-preserving than server-side mapping storage (which could be breached or subpoenaed), but less convenient than persistent de-anonymization because users must manually manage the mapping across sessions or lose the ability to reverse-substitute.
Offers core anonymization functionality at no cost and without requiring user registration, login, or API key management. The tool operates entirely client-side in the browser, eliminating the need for backend infrastructure to track users or store session data. This design removes financial and authentication barriers to privacy-conscious AI usage, though it also means no user-specific features, history, or cross-device synchronization.
Unique: Eliminates authentication and backend infrastructure entirely, operating as a pure client-side tool that requires no account creation, login, or data transmission to MaskMyPrompt servers. This design choice prioritizes user privacy and accessibility over feature richness and personalization, making privacy protection available to anyone with a browser.
vs alternatives: More accessible than enterprise DLP tools or privacy-as-a-service platforms that require registration and backend processing, but less feature-rich because it cannot offer history, cross-device sync, or advanced ML-based detection without server-side infrastructure.
Executes all PII detection, masking, and token mapping logic entirely within the user's browser using JavaScript, ensuring that raw prompts and sensitive data never leave the client device before anonymization. The tool does not transmit prompts, mappings, or metadata to MaskMyPrompt servers — only the anonymized prompt is sent to ChatGPT's API. This architecture eliminates MaskMyPrompt as a potential data intermediary, though it also means no server-side logging, analytics, or advanced ML models.
Unique: Implements a zero-trust architecture where all sensitive data processing occurs in the browser, eliminating MaskMyPrompt as a data intermediary entirely. Raw prompts and PII never leave the client device, reducing the attack surface and removing the need for users to trust MaskMyPrompt's data handling practices.
vs alternatives: More privacy-preserving than cloud-based privacy services that process data on servers, but less capable because it cannot leverage server-side ML models, centralized threat intelligence, or advanced detection algorithms that require computational resources beyond browser capabilities.
Replaces detected PII values with deterministic, human-readable tokens that follow a consistent naming scheme (e.g., [NAME_1], [EMAIL_1], [PHONE_1]) based on the type and order of detection. The same PII value always maps to the same token within a session, enabling consistent reference in multi-turn conversations and allowing users to manually track which token corresponds to which data type. However, the deterministic nature makes the masking structure obvious and potentially vulnerable to inference attacks if an attacker knows the token naming convention.
Unique: Uses deterministic, type-labeled tokens ([NAME_1], [EMAIL_1]) instead of random hashes or UUIDs, making the masking structure transparent and human-readable. This design prioritizes usability and consistency over cryptographic security, allowing users to manually verify masking and maintain context across multi-turn conversations.
vs alternatives: More transparent and user-friendly than opaque hashing or random token generation, but less secure because the deterministic structure and type labels reveal information about the masked data and make inference attacks easier.
Automatically inspects tabular data sources (Google Sheets, Airtable, Excel, CSV, SQL databases) to extract column names, infer field types (text, number, date, checkbox, etc.), and create bidirectional data bindings between UI components and source columns. Uses declarative component-to-column mappings that persist schema changes in real-time, enabling components to automatically reflect upstream data structure modifications without manual rebinding.
Unique: Glide's approach combines automatic schema introspection with declarative component binding, eliminating manual field mapping that competitors like Airtable require. The bidirectional sync model means changes to source column structure automatically propagate to UI components without developer intervention, reducing maintenance overhead for non-technical users.
vs alternatives: Faster to initial app than Airtable (which requires manual field configuration) and more flexible than rigid form builders because it adapts to evolving data structures automatically.
Provides 40+ pre-built, data-aware UI components (forms, tables, calendars, charts, buttons, text inputs, dropdowns, file uploads, maps, etc.) that automatically render responsively across mobile and desktop viewports. Components use a declarative binding syntax to connect to spreadsheet columns, with built-in support for computed fields, conditional visibility, and user-specific data filtering. Layout engine uses CSS Grid/Flexbox under the hood to adapt component sizing and positioning based on screen size without requiring manual breakpoint configuration.
Unique: Glide's component library is tightly integrated with data binding — components are not generic UI elements but data-aware objects that automatically sync with spreadsheet columns. This eliminates the disconnect between UI and data that exists in traditional form builders, where developers must manually wire component values to data sources.
vs alternatives: Faster to build than Bubble (which requires manual component-to-data wiring) and more mobile-optimized than Airtable's grid-centric interface, which prioritizes desktop spreadsheet metaphors over mobile-first design.
Glide scores higher at 70/100 vs MaskmyPrompt at 38/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Enables multiple team members to edit apps simultaneously with role-based access control. Supports predefined roles (Owner, Editor, Viewer) with different permission levels: Owners can manage team members and publish apps, Editors can modify app design and data, Viewers can only view published apps. Team member limits vary by plan (2 free, 10 business, custom enterprise). Real-time collaboration on app design is not mentioned, suggesting changes may not be synchronized in real-time between editors.
Unique: Glide's team collaboration is built into the platform, meaning team members don't need separate accounts or complex permission configuration — they're invited via email and assigned roles directly in the app. This is more seamless than tools requiring external identity management.
vs alternatives: More integrated than Airtable (which requires separate workspace management) and simpler than GitHub-based collaboration (which requires version control knowledge), though less sophisticated than enterprise platforms with audit logging and approval workflows.
Provides pre-built app templates for common use cases (inventory management, CRM, project management, expense tracking, etc.) that users can clone and customize. Templates include sample data, pre-configured components, and example workflows, reducing time-to-first-app from hours to minutes. Templates are fully editable, allowing users to modify data sources, components, and workflows to match their specific needs. Template library is curated by Glide and updated regularly with new templates.
Unique: Glide's templates are fully functional apps with sample data and workflows, not just empty scaffolds. This allows users to immediately see how components work together and understand app structure before customizing, reducing the learning curve significantly.
vs alternatives: More complete than Airtable's templates (which are mostly empty bases) and more accessible than building from scratch, though less flexible than code-based frameworks where templates can be parameterized and generated programmatically.
Allows workflows to be triggered on a schedule (daily, weekly, monthly, or custom intervals) without manual intervention. Scheduled workflows execute at specified times and can perform batch operations (process pending records, send daily reports, sync data, etc.). Execution time is in UTC, and the exact scheduling mechanism (cron, quartz, custom) is undocumented. Failed scheduled tasks may or may not retry automatically (retry logic undocumented).
Unique: Glide's scheduled workflows are integrated with the workflow engine, meaning scheduled tasks can execute the same complex logic as event-triggered workflows (conditional logic, multi-step actions, API calls). This is more powerful than simple scheduled email tools because scheduled tasks can perform data transformations and cross-system synchronization.
vs alternatives: More integrated than Zapier's schedule trigger (which is limited to simple actions) and more accessible than cron jobs (which require server access and scripting knowledge), though less transparent about execution guarantees and failure handling than enterprise job schedulers.
Offers Glide Tables, a proprietary managed database alternative to external spreadsheets or databases, with automatic scaling and optimization for Glide apps. Glide Tables are stored in Glide's infrastructure and optimized for the data binding and query patterns used by Glide apps. Scaling limits are plan-dependent (25k-100k rows), with separate 'Big Tables' tier for larger datasets (exact scaling limits undocumented). Automatic backups and disaster recovery are mentioned but details are undocumented.
Unique: Glide Tables are optimized specifically for Glide's data binding and query patterns, meaning they're tightly integrated with the app builder and don't require separate database administration. This is more seamless than connecting external databases (which require schema design and optimization knowledge) but less flexible because data is locked into Glide's proprietary format.
vs alternatives: More managed than self-hosted databases (no administration required) and more integrated than external databases (no separate configuration), though less portable than standard databases because data cannot be easily exported or migrated.
Provides basic chart components (bar, line, pie, area charts) that visualize data from connected sources. Charts are configured visually by selecting data columns for axes, values, and grouping. Charts are responsive and adapt to mobile/tablet/desktop. Real-time updates are supported; charts refresh when underlying data changes. No custom chart types or advanced visualization options (3D, animations, etc.) are available.
Unique: Provides basic chart components with automatic real-time updates and responsive design, suitable for simple dashboards — most visual builders (Bubble, FlutterFlow) require chart plugins or custom code
vs alternatives: More integrated than Airtable's chart view because real-time updates are automatic; weaker than BI tools (Tableau, Looker) because no drill-down, filtering, or advanced visualization options
Allows users to query data using natural language (e.g., 'Show me all orders from last month with revenue > $5k') which is converted to structured database queries without SQL knowledge. Also includes AI-powered data extraction from unstructured text (emails, documents, images) to populate spreadsheet columns. Implementation details (LLM model, context window, fine-tuning approach) are undocumented, but the feature appears to use prompt-based query generation with fallback to manual query building if AI fails.
Unique: Glide's natural language query feature bridges the gap between spreadsheet users (who think in English) and database queries (which require SQL). Rather than teaching users SQL, it translates natural language to structured queries, lowering the barrier to data exploration. The data extraction capability extends this to unstructured sources, automating data entry from emails and documents.
vs alternatives: More accessible than Airtable's formula language or traditional SQL, and more integrated than bolt-on AI query tools because it's built directly into the data layer rather than as a separate search interface.
+7 more capabilities