Skip to main content

Security report for appconsent.io

SFBX · Technology · United States

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

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

SFBX is a technology company specializing in consent management solutions through its platform AppConsent®. The company targets businesses needing GDPR and e-privacy compliance, offering a SaaS model with integration into major technologies such as Google Consent Mode v2. Their platform leverages a private blockchain to ensure secure and immutable consent records, positioning them as a trusted provider in the privacy compliance market. The website is professionally designed, SEO optimized, and mobile responsive, reflecting a mature digital presence. However, explicit privacy and cookie policies are not directly found on the main page, which could impact user trust and compliance perception. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS and domain protections, but could be enhanced by enabling DNSSEC and security headers. Overall, SFBX demonstrates a solid business and technical foundation with room for improvement in transparency and security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 100 · Low
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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 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 appconsent.io

This scan found 25 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
68

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

SFBX holds a strong market position with over 13,000 clients including major French enterprises. Their business model is SaaS-based, focusing on consent management and compliance services. The company benefits from certifications such as Google certification and active participation in industry associations like GESTE and IAB, which enhances credibility. Their private blockchain technology differentiates them in the market by providing robust proof of consent. The target customers range from SMEs to large accounts, indicating a scalable solution. The company is privacy-conscious, reflected in domain WHOIS privacy protection and product design. Growth indicators include a broad client base and integration with leading technologies. The partnership ecosystem includes documentation and application subdomains supporting the main service.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and domain status flags that prevent unauthorized transfer or deletion, indicating good domain security. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a recommended security enhancement. No explicit security headers were detected in the HTML content, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. There is no public security policy or incident response contact information, which limits transparency and readiness perception. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files were found, reducing the ability for coordinated vulnerability reporting. Overall, the security posture is moderate with foundational protections but lacking in advanced security practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies accessible from the homepage to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Add a security policy page and incident response contact information (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SFBX
Description
SFBX offers a consent management platform (CMP) called AppConsent® that helps optimize consent rates and ensure a respectful, personalized user experience. The platform is certified by Google and integrates with Google Consent Mode v2. It focuses on GDPR and e-privacy compliance, leveraging a private blockchain for secure and immutable consent storage.
Key services
Consent management platform (AppConsent®), Compliance with GDPR and e-privacy, Private blockchain for consent proof, Integration with Google Consent Mode v2
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Google Tag Manager, Google Consent Mode v2, Private Blockchain, jQuery
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is focused on GDPR-compliant consent management solutions.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policy pages found on the main page HTML.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  5. Strong branding and professional design with consistent messaging.
  6. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  7. Security could be improved by enabling DNSSEC and adding security headers.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information publicly available.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using Elementor page builder and Yoast SEO plugin, indicating a modern and widely supported technology stack. It integrates Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing, and supports Google Consent Mode v2 for consent-aware tracking. Hosting appears to be via Google Cloud DNS services, suggesting reliable infrastructure. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility at a basic level. The site uses jQuery and various Elementor and Essential Addons plugins. Technical debt is minimal but could be improved by optimizing security headers and enabling DNSSEC. The private blockchain technology mentioned is a key technical differentiator but details are not exposed on the main page. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid with opportunities for security and performance enhancements.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 68/100Medium34 findingsView report
  2. 68/100Medium34 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with appconsent.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 appconsent.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.