Executive Summary
ChiliPiper B2B Email Intelligence is a demand conversion platform that helps B2B companies qualify, route, and schedule meetings. Founded in 2016 by Nicolas and Alina Vandenberghe in New York, the company has raised $64.84M and reached $43M ARR by 2025. While ChiliPiper maintains SOC2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR, and CCPA compliance certifications through their trust center, runtime analysis reveals significant disclosure gaps: their website loads 48 third-party vendors while only 2 subprocessors (AWS, Google Cloud Platform) are disclosed. Of particular concern, 19 vendors including MetaPixel, HubSpot, GoogleAds, LinkedIn, and identity resolution providers fire before consent is obtained, representing a 4.5% pre-consent tracking rate that contradicts their compliance positioning.
Revenue Threat Profile
4 COLLAPSE VECTORSHow this vendor creates financial exposure. Each score (0-100) reflects observed runtime behavior and documented business practices.
CAC Subsidization
ChiliPiper embeds multiple analytics and marketing platforms (GoogleAnalytics4, Clarity, HockeyStack) that capture visitor behavior data. This data may flow to third parties who aggregate it across sites, potentially corrupting attribution by mixing ChiliPiper customer data with competitor intelligence.
Signal Corruption
The presence of identity resolution vendors (RB2B, ZoomInfo, LeadRocket) and demand capture tools on their own website means visitor intent signals are being captured and potentially resold. Competitors evaluating ChiliPiper may have their interest signals leaked to the very identity resolution ecosystem ChiliPiper operates within.
Legal Tail Risk
With 48 third-party scripts loading, including many from the GTM surveillance ecosystem (Clay, ZoomInfo, RB2B, TrenDemon), ChiliPiper expands its attack surface significantly. Any compromise of these undisclosed vendors could impact ChiliPiper customers or leak visitor data.
GTM Attack Surface
The gap between compliance claims (SOC2, ISO27001, GDPR, CCPA badges) and runtime behavior (19 pre-consent vendors, 46+ undisclosed subprocessors) creates substantial consent liability. The privacy policy admits to data sale under CCPA, which is transparent, but the minimal subprocessor list (2 vs 48 detected) may not satisfy GDPR Article 28 requirements for processor disclosure.