Skip to main content

Security report for chainguard.dev

Chainguard · Technology · United States

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Chainguard is a technology company specializing in secure container images and open source software supply chain security. Their website presents a professional and comprehensive overview of their offerings, including hardened containers, libraries, and virtual machines rebuilt daily to ensure security and compliance. The company targets developers, security teams, and enterprises seeking to reduce vulnerabilities and accelerate compliance with standards such as FedRAMP and PCI DSS. The site features strong branding, customer testimonials, and partner logos, positioning Chainguard as a trusted leader in container security. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks like Next.js and React, with optimized performance and excellent mobile responsiveness. The use of Google Tag Manager indicates moderate analytics and tracking capabilities. However, the site lacks explicit privacy and cookie policies, which is a notable compliance gap. Security-wise, HTTPS is enforced, but security headers and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are absent, suggesting room for improvement in security posture. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional, with a strong business credibility score. The absence of direct contact emails or phone numbers limits immediate contact options, relying primarily on contact forms. The WHOIS data aligns well with the business claims, showing consistent registrant information and domain age appropriate for the company's market presence. Strategic recommendations include publishing comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, implementing security headers, adding vulnerability disclosure and incident response information, and providing direct contact channels for security concerns to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

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 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

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

Keep watching chainguard.dev

This scan found 19 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
72
Security headers
60
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
78

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 chainguard.dev, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for chainguard.dev 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

Chainguard operates in the technology sector, focusing on container security and secure open source software delivery. Their business model revolves around providing minimal, vulnerability-free container images and related artifacts to enterprises and developers. The company leverages partnerships and customer success stories to strengthen market positioning. Their offerings address critical compliance needs such as FedRAMP and PCI DSS, appealing to regulated industries. The presence of a value calculator and educational resources indicates a customer-centric approach aimed at demonstrating ROI and facilitating adoption. Growth indicators include a broad catalog of containers and a strong G2 rating. The company maintains a consistent brand image and targets medium to large enterprises with security and compliance priorities.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level. HTTPS is properly configured, ensuring encrypted communications. However, the absence of key security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file is present, limiting transparency and incident response readiness. The lack of direct security contact emails or abuse reporting channels is a gap in incident response preparedness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced by adopting best practices in security headers, disclosure policies, and contact mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve privacy compliance.
  2. Implement and configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Provide direct security and abuse contact emails to enhance incident response capabilities.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Chainguard
Description
Chainguard provides hardened, vulnerability-free container images designed to keep infrastructure secure and efficient. They offer trusted open source artifacts for modern software stacks, including containers, libraries, and virtual machines, rebuilt from source daily.
Key services
Chainguard Containers, Chainguard Libraries, Chainguard VMs, Secure open source software delivery, Compliance acceleration (FedRAMP, PCI DSS), Continuous CVE remediation
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Next.js, React, Google Tag Manager, SVG graphics
Frameworks
Next.js
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure scripts and fonts
  • No inline scripts detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
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. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is rich, professionally designed, and well-structured.
  3. Strong focus on container security and compliance solutions.
  4. Multiple customer testimonials and partner logos enhance trust.
  5. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  6. Contact available only via contact form; no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and frameworks.
  8. Security headers not explicitly detected; room for improvement.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. No explicit data protection officer or incident response contacts.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Next.js and React, indicating a modern and scalable front-end architecture. It uses optimized images and SVGs for graphics, contributing to fast load times and good performance. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing tracking. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessible navigation. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site generation approach. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The technical implementation is robust, but the lack of security headers and privacy policies indicates some technical debt in security and compliance areas. Opportunities exist to enhance security posture and privacy compliance through configuration and policy additions.
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 chainguard.dev. 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 chainguard.dev.

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.