Crypton.sh vs Quackr
It is a trade-off. Quackr has the higher Safety grade (5.2 against 5.0), while Crypton.sh has the higher Privacy grade (7.7 against 5.1).
Crypton.sh
Cloud-hosted physical SIM numbers, travel eSIMs and SMS with no name or email
Privacy
7.7/ 10
Strong
Safety
5.0/ 10
Caution
ID never required KYC 0 Docs reviewed Full review →
Quackr
Free shared temporary numbers and paid private non-VoIP number rentals
Privacy
5.1/ 10
Caution
Safety
5.2/ 10
Caution
No ID mentioned KYC 1 Docs reviewed Full review →
Side by side
| Crypton.sh | Quackr | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Phone Numbers & SMS | Phone Numbers & SMS |
| KYC policy | ID never required | No ID mentioned |
| Custody | N/A | N/A |
| Sign-up | No account needed | Email required |
| Open source | No | No |
| Tor onion address | Yes | No |
| Pay with | Crypto | Card, PayPal, Crypto |
| Fees | Number rentals about €14–28/month by country when checked | Public numbers free; private number pricing not confirmed during this review |
| Founded | Not published | 2020 |
| Jurisdiction | Not published | Hong Kong |
| Incidents on record | 0 | 0 |
| Published tests (180 days) | 0 | 0 |
Only Crypton.sh
No email neededTor onion serviceRuns an affiliate programme
Both
Nothing distinct
Only Quackr
Requires emailAML screeningLegal entity disclosed
Where they sit among phone numbers & sms
Questions
Is Crypton.sh or Quackr safer?
Quackr has the higher Safety grade: Crypton.sh 5.0, Quackr 5.2, out of 10.
Does Crypton.sh or Quackr require KYC?
Crypton.sh is KYC level 0 (ID never required). Quackr is KYC level 1 (no ID mentioned).
Which has more incidents on record?
Crypton.sh has 0 and Quackr has 0 documented incidents in the registry.