Every category where a model named T-Pot for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
Deception technology	Security operations	2%	9 of 94	9%	11	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for T-Pot yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated T-Pot across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0	1	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	2	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	0	0	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	0	0	0
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	2	0	0	2
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	1	0	0	1
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	1	0	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase17 labelsNone

Comparative1 labelNone

Budget-constrained10 labels1

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative31 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Pick `T-Pot` if you have ≥1 person who knows Linux, Docker, and log analysis, and you want maximum detection surface for $0.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Deception · budget prompt · first choice

“2. T-Pot - an open-source honeypot platform that combines multiple protocol-specific honeypots and analytics tools.” Llama 4 Maverick · Deception · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“T-Pot is a strong option... but it has higher operational overhead and infrastructure requirements” GPT-5.4 mini · Deception · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Open-source / engineer-led alternative: T-Pot ... you own the upkeep, tuning and SIEM integration” Muse Glimmer 30B · Deception · paraphrase prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“High maintenance (Docker-heavy); better for labs than production.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Deception · paraphrase prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as T-Pot, over the 31 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and T-Pot was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Thinkst Canary21 of 3113Compare →

OpenCanary19 of 317Compare →

Cowrie17 of 310Not among the top eight

Trapster8 of 311Not among the top eight

Acalvio ShadowPlex7 of 311Compare →

Canarytokens5 of 311Not among the top eight

HoneyWire4 of 311Not among the top eight

Dionaea4 of 310Not among the top eight

Zscaler Deception4 of 310Not among the top eight

FortiDeceptor3 of 310Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named T-Pot. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 28 of the 31 answers that named T-Pot and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

securityhive.io19

guideflow.com17

canary.tools13

sourceforge.net13

trapster.cloud13

us.fitgap.com13

worldmetrics.org13

gitnux.org12

vendr.com11

acalvio.com9

No domain is on file for T-Pot, so its own site is not marked.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/honeypot-software16

securityhive.io/blog/best-honeypot-solutions-in-202516

canary.tools/13

sourceforge.net/software/deception-technology/for-small-business13

worldmetrics.org/best/honeypot-software13

vendr.com/marketplace/thinkst-canary11

trapster.cloud/en/blog/best-honeypots10

devopsschool.com/blog/top-10-deception-technology-tools-features-pros-cons-comparison8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

Where T-Pot stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Searches for its name, Google: 1,600 a month (“t-pot”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 170 a month
Its own site: No site of its own on file, so no site figures

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 9 of 94 in deception

Segment leader

37%

Thinkst Canary

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 31 answers
Its own site cited: No site on file to match

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read October 5, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

Names read as T-Pot

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as T-Pot; a claim can dispute any of them.

T‑Pot 2

Follow T-Pot

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when T-Pot's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as T-Pot, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for T-Pot by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where T-Pot is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name T-Pot, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.