Skip to main content

Security report for adsdefender.com

Ads Defender · Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Ads Defender is a specialized European technology company focused on protecting advertisers from click fraud and unqualified paid traffic, primarily targeting Google Ads users. The company offers a GDPR-compliant SaaS solution that evaluates paid traffic in real-time to safeguard advertising budgets. Their market position is strengthened by their official Google Partner status and a clear focus on European data protection standards. Technically, the website is built on Webflow and integrates multiple modern analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Hotjar, and Facebook Pixel, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, though some security best practices like security headers and explicit incident response policies are missing. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy, but the absence of WHOIS data and direct contact information slightly reduces business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching adsdefender.com

This scan found 23 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
57
Security headers
60
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
70

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention adsdefender.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
8
Employees
0
Customers
8
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
13%

1 subdomain affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for adsdefender.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Ads Defender operates in the technology sector providing click fraud prevention services to advertisers, particularly those using Google Ads. Their business model is B2B SaaS with additional consulting via live sessions. The company leverages partnerships with Google and integrates advanced tracking and analytics tools to optimize client campaigns. Their target customers are marketing professionals and agencies concerned about ad budget wastage due to fraudulent clicks. The company demonstrates growth potential through its specialized niche and compliance with GDPR, which is a competitive advantage in the European market. However, the lack of publicly available WHOIS data and contact details may hinder trust for some prospects. The partnership ecosystem includes Google and Hurra.com, supporting their marketing and analytics capabilities.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism aligned with GDPR requirements. The use of reputable third-party analytics and marketing tools is well managed without exposing sensitive data. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and lack of a published security policy or incident response plan indicate areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected in the content. The company should consider publishing explicit security and incident response information and providing dedicated security contact channels to enhance trust and compliance readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Create and make publicly available a security policy and incident response plan to improve transparency and preparedness.
  3. Add explicit contact information for security incidents such as a security@ or abuse@ email address.
  4. Consider publishing a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosures and improve security communication.
  5. Enhance contact information availability on the website to improve business credibility and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ads Defender
Description
Ads Defender offers a European solution to protect advertising campaigns from click fraud and unqualified traffic from bots, competitors, and other sources. The service is GDPR-compliant and focuses on securing paid traffic budgets.
Key services
Click fraud detection and prevention, Real-time traffic evaluation, Integration with Google Ads (Google Display Network and Performance Max), Personalized live consulting
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, OWAPro Web Analytics, Google Optimize, FirstPromoter, Webflow CMS, jQuery, Custom tracking scripts from cdn.adsdefender.com
Platforms
Webflow
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure third-party analytics and tracking

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar, OWAPro Web Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Google Ads Conversion Tracking, Hotjar
Marketing tools
Google Optimize, StructureOptimizer
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. Strong focus on GDPR compliance and European data protection standards.
  3. Multiple third-party marketing and analytics integrations present.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the main pages.
  5. WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual for an active commercial site.
  6. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with detailed cookie categories.
  7. Google Partner badge prominently displayed indicating partnership with Google.
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Webflow CMS and employs a modern technology stack including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and other marketing and analytics tools. The site is mobile optimized with good design quality and clear navigation. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and use of CDN-hosted assets. Accessibility is basic but functional. There is no evidence of outdated or vulnerable libraries. The technical infrastructure supports a professional marketing SaaS business but could benefit from improved security header implementation and more detailed technical documentation for compliance purposes.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with adsdefender.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review adsdefender.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.