Skip to main content

Security report for calendarrules.com

CalendarRules · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

CalendarRules is a specialized legal technology company providing automated court rules-based calendaring software to law firms across the United States. With over 2000 rule sets and partnerships with leading case management systems, they serve thousands of firms and calculate millions of deadlines annually. Their platform emphasizes accuracy, comprehensive rule coverage, and seamless integration with popular calendar and docketing tools. Technically, the website is built on modern web technologies including Webflow CMS and Google Tag Manager, offering excellent mobile optimization and user experience. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and secure forms, though explicit security headers and incident response policies are not publicly documented. The WHOIS data for the domain is incomplete or missing, which raises some concerns about domain registration legitimacy, but the professional content and business presence mitigate this risk. Overall, CalendarRules presents as a credible and established player in the legal calendaring market.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

3 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. 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 calendarrules.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. 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
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
72

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 calendarrules.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1
Employees
0
Customers
1
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
100%

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 calendarrules.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

CalendarRules operates a B2B SaaS model targeting law firms of all sizes, providing critical calendaring and docketing services based on court rules. Their competitive advantage lies in their comprehensive and up-to-date rule sets, rapid update capabilities, and integration ecosystem with over 20 calendar and case management systems. The company has a high customer retention rate and a broad customer base exceeding 1600 firms. Their marketing emphasizes reliability, accuracy, and ease of use, supported by a professional website and multiple contact channels. Partnerships with dockettools.com and ruleslist.com enhance their service offerings. The company appears to be medium-sized, founded in 2007, and focused on continuous technological innovation in legal calendaring.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses secure form submissions, indicating a baseline of security best practices. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics, with no evidence of vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data in the HTML. However, explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy are not clearly present in the provided data, and no public security or incident response policies are found. The absence of a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page suggests room for improvement in transparency and incident readiness. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by publishing formal security policies and implementing additional HTTP security headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify HTTP security headers including X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Content-Security-Policy to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.
  5. Enhance WHOIS domain registration transparency to align domain data with business claims and improve legitimacy perception.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CalendarRules
Description
CalendarRules partners with over 20 calendar/docket/case management systems, serving thousands of subscribers at over 1,600 firms, calculating over 750,000 deadlines per month. They provide automated court rules-based calendaring software with more than 2000 rule sets nationwide, serving firms of all sizes.
Key services
Court rules calendaring software, Rule set building and updating, Integrations with calendar and case management systems, Date and docket calculators, Docket research tools
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Webflow CMS, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, JavaScript, HTML5 Video, CSS3
Frameworks
Webflow
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure forms with validation
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and interactive features
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  3. Professional legal calendaring service with strong market presence
  4. WHOIS data incomplete or domain not found, requiring further verification
  5. Good privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  6. Multiple contact methods and clear business information provided
  7. Use of modern web technologies and good mobile optimization
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Webflow CMS, leveraging modern web standards such as HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. It uses Google Fonts for typography and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing tracking. The site is hosted on Webflow's CDN, providing fast performance and excellent mobile responsiveness. Video backgrounds and sliders enhance user engagement without compromising load times. The site structure is clear with well-organized navigation and multiple interactive forms for lead capture. No CMS vulnerabilities or outdated technologies are evident. Opportunities exist to improve accessibility features and SEO metadata further, but overall the technical implementation is robust and modern.
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 calendarrules.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 calendarrules.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.