Skip to content
The Algorithm
vs Cognizant×United States
Why United States clients switch

The Algorithm vs Cognizant in United States

Cognizant's US operations are the point where their offshore delivery model intersects with the US regulatory environments that most restrict offshore data access. There is a better model for United States.

The Regional Problem

What Cognizant gets wrong in United States

Cognizant's US operations are the point where their offshore delivery model intersects with the US regulatory environments that most restrict offshore data access. BSA/AML transaction monitoring data, HIPAA-protected health information, and FedRAMP-scoped government data all have US access control requirements that create compliance complexity for an offshore-first delivery model. Cognizant manages these requirements through contractual data handling agreements and access control architectures — mechanisms that satisfy the compliance documentation requirement but create ongoing management overhead that the offshore model was supposed to eliminate.

The Clorox attack — where Cognizant's US helpdesk gave network credentials to hackers — illustrates the security risk of outsourcing security-sensitive functions to a cost-optimized managed services model. The helpdesk operator was not negligent — they were following a process designed for throughput, not for security. The process was designed that way because the business model optimizes for cost, not for security posture. For US clients with HIPAA, SOC 2, or FISMA compliance obligations, the Cognizant security culture that produced the Clorox incident is a compliance counterparty risk.

Regional Compliance

United States frameworks we deploy natively

HIPAA
SOC 2
FedRAMP
CCPA
NIST
NIST AI RMF
FDA 21 CFR Part 11
HITRUST
StateRAMP

Our US engagements are delivered by US-based teams for work involving BSA/AML data, HIPAA PHI, or FedRAMP-scoped systems. The architecture enforces data handling requirements at the infrastructure layer — access controls are not a contractual commitment, they are a system design.

No managed services dependency. Full IP transfer at close. Your US team operates the system. The helpdesk function, if needed, is supported by documented procedures with compliance-aware access management — not by a cost-optimized process designed for throughput.

Compliance Note

HIPAA, SOC 2, FedRAMP (US-citizen engineering teams), BSA/AML. US compliance requires US-based engineering for regulated data. Cognizant's offshore model creates compliance complexity that we eliminate by design.

Engagement Model

US technology engagement: 8-20 weeks. Fixed price. US-based team for FedRAMP-scoped work. Full IP transfer at close.

DECISION GUIDE

Vendor Lock-In Exit Guide

How to identify, quantify, and systematically eliminate dependency on Cognizant in United States — without breaking production. Covers dependency mapping, exit plan design, and migration execution.

X

United States clients: leave Cognizant.

HIPAA and SOC 2-native engineering. Fixed price. Production system in 8-16 weeks.

Start the Conversation
Related
Compare
vs Cognizant
Compare
All Comparisons
Region
United States
Get Started
Contact Us
Engage Us