Skip to main content

Security report for codebasehq.com

Krystal Hosting Ltd. · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Codebase is a mature and established SaaS platform offering Git, Mercurial, and Subversion hosting combined with project management tools tailored for professional development teams. Operated by Krystal Hosting Ltd., the company has a strong UK presence and a user base exceeding 30,000. The website content is professional, well-structured, and targets software development teams seeking integrated code hosting and project management solutions. Technically, the site leverages custom technologies, SVG assets, and Matomo analytics, hosted on Katapult's cloud infrastructure. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate critically undermines the security posture, despite HSTS being enabled. No cookie consent mechanism or published security policies were found, indicating gaps in privacy compliance and incident response readiness. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the business claims, supporting legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

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

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 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

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

Keep watching codebasehq.com

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
90
Security headers
70
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
43
Average
63

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 codebasehq.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
852
Employees
0
Customers
852
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
13%

218 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 codebasehq.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

The company positions itself as a reliable provider of integrated code hosting and project management services, differentiating through a combination of version control support and ticketing systems. Its business model is subscription-based SaaS targeting professional development teams globally, with a strong UK operational base. The ecosystem includes partnerships with Katapult for hosting, Krystal for web services, and other specialized service providers, enhancing its service portfolio. The website's testimonials and domain age reinforce market credibility. Growth indicators include a broad feature set and a sizable user base. The lack of direct contact information on the main site may limit immediate customer engagement but is offset by clear signup and support links.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate to low due to the critical absence of a valid SSL certificate, which prevents secure HTTPS connections. While HSTS is configured, it is ineffective without SSL. The site shows no signs of common SSL/TLS vulnerabilities but lacks advanced security headers and mechanisms such as OCSP stapling and session resumption. No published security or incident response policies were found, and no dedicated security contact channels exist. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism despite active analytics tracking. These gaps expose the business to potential compliance risks and reduce user trust. Immediate remediation of SSL and privacy controls is recommended to improve security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user data.
  2. Implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and inform users about tracking.
  3. Publish clear security policies and incident response procedures, including dedicated security contact information.
  4. Enhance security headers by adding Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  5. Enable OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Krystal Hosting Ltd.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with custom CSS and JavaScript, uses SVG images for graphics, and integrates Matomo for analytics, indicating a moderate level of technical maturity. Hosting is provided by Katapult, a cloud platform powered by renewable energy, reflecting modern infrastructure choices. Performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4.7 seconds and 33 resources loaded. The site is mobile optimized and SEO-friendly with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. However, the lack of a valid SSL certificate is a significant technical debt. No CMS or major frameworks were detected, suggesting a custom or lightweight platform. Opportunities exist to modernize SSL/TLS configuration and improve accessibility 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 codebasehq.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 codebasehq.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.