Skip to main content

Security report for canny.io

Canny · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Canny is a well-established SaaS company specializing in customer feedback management software designed to help product teams collect, analyze, prioritize, and share user feedback effectively. The website positions Canny as a leading platform trusted by over 50,000 companies, offering comprehensive tools including AI-powered feedback discovery and integrations with popular project management and CRM systems. The business targets product managers, customer success teams, sales, and enterprises seeking to improve product development through user insights. Technically, the website is built on modern JavaScript frameworks such as React and leverages a robust set of third-party analytics and marketing tools including HubSpot, Mixpanel, Intercom, and Google Tag Manager. Hosting is provided via Amazon AWS infrastructure, ensuring scalability and reliability. However, the website suffers from a critical security issue: the SSL certificate is invalid or missing, and no modern TLS protocols are enabled, which severely impacts the security posture and user trust. Additionally, the site lacks important security headers and has a slow page load time, which could affect user experience and SEO. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and GDPR indicators. Overall, while the business and content quality are excellent, the security shortcomings represent a significant risk that should be remediated promptly.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of canny.io. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

2 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

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

Keep watching canny.io

This scan found 13 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
50
Security headers
75
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
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 canny.io, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4,490
Employees
0
Customers
4,452
Third parties
38
Weak passwords
61%

241 subdomains 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 canny.io.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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

Canny operates in the technology sector as a SaaS provider focused on customer feedback and product management solutions. Its market position is strong, with a large customer base and extensive integrations that enhance its competitive advantage. The business model is subscription-based, targeting a wide range of customers from startups to enterprises. Revenue streams likely include tiered subscription plans and enterprise contracts. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem with integrations to major platforms like Slack, Jira, Salesforce, and HubSpot. Growth indicators include a large volume of feedback items captured and product updates sent, as well as active community engagement via social media and Discord. Strategic observations suggest Canny emphasizes ease of use, scalability, and AI-driven automation to differentiate itself in a competitive market.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of support for modern TLS protocols, exposing users to potential interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. The absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS further weakens the defense against common web attacks. No vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed or POODLE were detected, but the lack of OCSP stapling and session resumption indicates suboptimal SSL/TLS configuration. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms are in place, supporting GDPR compliance. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure information are not explicitly found, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. Overall, the security maturity is low and requires immediate attention to SSL/TLS and header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate supporting TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols to secure all website traffic.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload, Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Enable OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  4. Conduct regular security audits of third-party scripts and dependencies to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Publish a clear vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information to improve security transparency and readiness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern React-based frontend with extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing scripts such as HubSpot, Mixpanel, Intercom, and Google Tag Manager. Hosting is on AWS, indicated by DNS nameservers and IP addresses. Despite modern technologies, the site suffers from slow load times (18.2 seconds) and a large page size (554 KB) with 309 resources, indicating potential optimization opportunities. Accessibility and mobile optimization are good, with responsive design and skip navigation links. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags and Open Graph data. The lack of a valid SSL certificate and missing security headers represent technical debt and risk. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires performance tuning and security hardening.
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. 87/100Low21 findingsView report
  2. 87/100Low21 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with canny.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 canny.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.