Skip to main content

Security report for allforms.io

AllForms, Inc. · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

AllForms, Inc. operates a SaaS platform designed to consolidate and replace over 16 commonly used business tools such as DocuSign, TypeForm, Calendly, ChatGPT, and Semrush. The platform targets small to medium businesses and solopreneurs seeking to reduce software subscription costs and simplify their tool stack. Positioned as a cost-effective alternative, AllForms offers a subscription model starting at $29/month with a 7-day free trial and a 30-day money-back guarantee. The website is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and provides clear messaging on cost savings and ease of use. Technically, the site leverages modern frameworks like Next.js and React, hosted on Vercel, with secure payment integration via Stripe. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and security headers implemented, though explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly disclosed. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection, which is justified for this business type but slightly reduces trust signals. Overall, the site is trustworthy, professional, and well-positioned in the SaaS productivity market.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching allforms.io

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
67

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 allforms.io, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for allforms.io right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

AllForms targets a niche of businesses overwhelmed by multiple SaaS subscriptions, offering a unified platform that replaces expensive tools with a single subscription. The business model is subscription-based SaaS with a focus on cost savings and simplicity. The company leverages partnerships with Stripe for payments and Trustlock for trust badges, enhancing credibility. The platform's broad feature set includes AI chat, e-signatures, scheduling, SEO tools, and more, appealing to startups, solopreneurs, and small teams. The website's content quality and branding consistency support a strong market position. However, the lack of public contact information and WHOIS transparency may limit some trust for cautious customers. The company appears to be small-sized and focused on technology sector clients.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with HTTPS enforced and multiple security headers present, indicating adherence to best practices. Payment processing is securely handled via Stripe, a reputable provider. However, the absence of a visible cookie consent mechanism and explicit security or incident response policies are gaps in compliance and transparency. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a published vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file limits the ability for coordinated vulnerability reporting. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be improved with enhanced transparency and compliance features.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a visible cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Provide clear company contact information including support and sales emails or phone numbers.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve inclusivity and compliance with standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
AllForms, Inc.
Description
AllForms offers a unified platform that replaces over 16 expensive business tools including DocuSign, TypeForm, Calendly, ChatGPT, Semrush, OpenVC, and more, providing a cost-effective solution starting at $29/month.
Key services
AI-powered chat assistant, Screen recording, Email finder and verification, SEO tools, File transfer, Email signature generation, QR code generation, Logo design, Invoice generation, E-signatures
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, Vercel Storage, Stripe (payment processing), Google Fonts
Frameworks
Next.js, React
Platforms
Vercel
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure payment integration via Stripe

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Comprehensive all-in-one SaaS platform replacing multiple expensive tools
  2. Clear pricing and free trial offer
  3. Strong emphasis on cost savings and ease of use
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed
  5. Privacy and terms pages present and accessible
  6. No cookie consent banner detected
  7. No explicit security or incident response contact information
  8. Modern, fast, and mobile-optimized website design
  9. Use of trusted third-party services for payments and fonts
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React and Next.js, hosted on Vercel, ensuring fast performance and scalability. It uses Google Fonts for typography and Stripe for payment processing, indicating integration with trusted third-party services. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good SEO practices including comprehensive meta tags and Open Graph data. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary content management approach. The technical implementation is robust with no broken elements or errors observed. Opportunities exist to improve accessibility and add more explicit privacy and security compliance features.
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 allforms.io. 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 allforms.io.

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.