Skip to main content

Security report for competitionlabs.com

CompetitionLabs · Technology · Malta

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

CompetitionLabs is a Malta-based technology company specializing in real-time gamification platforms designed to boost user engagement, particularly in the e-gaming sector. Their platform offers a comprehensive suite of gamification tools including tournaments, challenges, jackpots, dynamic segmentation, and personalized user journeys. The company positions itself as an industry leader in gamification transformation with a B2B SaaS business model targeting businesses seeking to enhance player engagement through gamified experiences. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using Visual Composer and integrates modern JavaScript libraries and tracking tools such as Google Analytics and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good SEO and accessibility practices, although some advanced security headers are missing. The platform emphasizes GDPR compliance with a clear cookie consent mechanism and comprehensive privacy policies. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and anonymizes data to comply with privacy regulations. However, explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not published, which could be improved. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The domain registration details align well with the business claims, supporting the legitimacy of the company. Overall, CompetitionLabs presents a professional and trustworthy online presence with a solid technical foundation and good privacy compliance. Strategic improvements in security transparency and incident response readiness would further enhance their security posture and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
55/ 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

6 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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';…

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

Keep watching competitionlabs.com

This scan found 22 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
55
Average
51

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

CompetitionLabs operates in the gamification technology sector, providing real-time engagement solutions primarily for the e-gaming industry. Their competitive advantage lies in offering a scalable, automated platform that integrates seamlessly with existing systems and supports dynamic user segmentation and localization. The business model is subscription-based SaaS targeting medium-sized enterprises and larger clients. The company maintains an active partnership ecosystem with technology providers like Kafka, RabbitMQ, and AWS, enhancing their platform's robustness. Growth indicators include a comprehensive content strategy with blogs and case studies, and a strong social media presence. The company is registered in Malta and has been operational since 2015, indicating market maturity and stability.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, anonymized data handling, and GDPR-compliant cookie consent. However, the absence of explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates room for improvement in transparency and preparedness. No vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The use of third-party analytics and tracking pixels is balanced with user consent mechanisms. Overall, the security maturity is good but could benefit from publishing formal security documentation and enhancing HTTP security headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Add security HTTP headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Continue maintaining GDPR compliance and enhance transparency around data retention policies.
  5. Regularly audit third-party libraries and scripts to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CompetitionLabs
Description
Boost your player engagement with our easy to integrate real-time gamification platform & gamification toolkit.
Key services
Real-time gamification toolset, Tournaments, challenges, missions & jackpots, Dynamic segmentation, Personalised user journeys, Localization and compliance support, Automation and integration
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Visual Composer (WPBakery), jQuery, Google Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Owl Carousel, Code Prettify
Frameworks
WordPress, WPBakery Visual Composer
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by og:url and script sources using https)
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-out and settings
  • Use of anonymized data as per site claims

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
LinkedIn Insight Tag
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS and modern web technologies
  2. Comprehensive privacy and cookie policies present
  3. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected
  4. No explicit security policy or incident response info found
  5. Professional and consistent branding and content
  6. Social media presence on major platforms
  7. Cookie consent mechanism is active and GDPR compliant
  8. No phone numbers or emails explicitly listed on main pages
  9. Contact available via contact form only
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using the WPBakery Visual Composer plugin for page building. It leverages common JavaScript libraries including jQuery and Owl Carousel for UI components. Analytics are implemented via Google Analytics and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The site is mobile responsive and optimized for SEO with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate, with room for optimization in loading speed and accessibility features. Hosting provider details are not explicitly disclosed. The technical stack is modern and well-maintained, supporting scalability and integration capabilities.
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 competitionlabs.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 competitionlabs.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.