Skip to main content

Security report for comparesoft.com

Comparesoft · Technology · United Kingdom

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and DNS health.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Comparesoft is a UK-based B2B software comparison platform established in 2004, offering a trusted service to help businesses of all sizes identify and select the right software products. The platform leverages machine learning and human expertise to provide unbiased recommendations without ads or fake reviews, serving a broad audience including micro to enterprise businesses. The website demonstrates strong branding, professional design, and clear navigation, positioning itself as a credible and reliable resource in the software comparison market. Technically, the site is built on WordPress, hosted on AWS infrastructure, and integrates modern analytics and tracking tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Mouseflow. While performance and mobile optimization are good, there is room for improvement in accessibility and SEO. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and domain protection statuses, but lacks visible security headers and explicit security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies or consent mechanisms. Overall, the site is trustworthy and professional but should enhance privacy and security transparency to improve compliance and user trust.

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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Weak SPF Policy

      SPF record has permissive policy allowing any server to send email

      What to do: Use -all or ~all qualifier for better email security

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

Keep watching comparesoft.com

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
77
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
79

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

Comparesoft operates in the technology sector, focusing on software comparison and recommendation services for B2B clients. Its competitive advantage lies in its no-ad, no-fake-review policy and the use of advanced machine learning algorithms combined with human validation to ensure accurate product matchmaking. The business model centers on providing free software shortlisting and communication tools, likely monetized through supplier partnerships or lead generation. The platform targets UK-based businesses across various sizes and industries, with a strong presence evidenced by endorsements from major organizations like the US Military and University of Oxford. Growth indicators include a large user base of over 19,000 businesses and continuous feature updates. The company maintains a clean partnership ecosystem with no suspicious domains detected. Strategic observations suggest focusing on expanding privacy compliance and security policies to align with evolving regulations and enhance market trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and domain status protections that prevent unauthorized domain changes. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options indicates potential areas for improvement. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. The lack of published security policies or incident response contacts suggests limited transparency in security governance. Compliance gaps exist regarding GDPR and cookie consent mechanisms, which could expose the business to regulatory risks. The current data protection practices rely on standard analytics tools without explicit user consent. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not evident from the site content. Overall, while no critical vulnerabilities were found, enhancing security headers, publishing security policies, and implementing cookie consent would strengthen the security posture significantly.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  3. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to harden the website against common attacks.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance with data protection regulations.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Comparesoft Ltd
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Comparesoft
Description
B2B software comparison platform designed to recommend the best products. Review UK based Software. Create your shortlist for free.
Key services
Software requirements planning and outlining, B2B software product matchmaking using machine learning, Shortlisting and comparing software products, Communication management with software suppliers, Booking demos and publishing tenders
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Growthbook (feature flagging/experimentation), Mouseflow (user behavior analytics), WordPress CMS, AWS DNS hosting
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

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

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Mouseflow
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
DoubleClick, Mouseflow
Marketing tools
Growthbook
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional B2B software comparison platform targeting UK businesses
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found on homepage HTML
  3. Contact phone number clearly provided in header
  4. No contact email or contact forms detected in provided HTML
  5. Use of modern analytics and tracking tools without explicit cookie consent banner
  6. No visible security policy or incident response information on site
  7. Strong branding consistency and trust signals including testimonials and client logos
  8. Domain is well aged and registered with reputable registrar
  9. No WAF or blocking detected, full content accessible
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS and hosted on AWS infrastructure, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Growthbook, and Mouseflow. The site uses preconnect and preload optimizations for fonts and resources, indicating attention to performance. Mobile responsiveness and SEO meta tags are well implemented, contributing to good user experience and search visibility. However, accessibility features appear basic and could be enhanced for broader compliance. The site does not currently implement DNSSEC, which is a technical gap in domain security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and stable but could benefit from additional security hardening and accessibility improvements to reduce technical debt and future-proof the platform.
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 comparesoft.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 comparesoft.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.