Skip to main content

Security report for coupler.io

Railsware Products Studio, LLC · Technology · United States

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Coupler.io is a mature SaaS platform specializing in sales, finance, and marketing data integration and reporting. It serves a broad audience including marketing professionals, sales teams, finance departments, and agencies, with a strong market presence evidenced by over 1 million users and notable clients such as Uber, Google, and Microsoft. The platform offers extensive data connectors, dashboard templates, and consulting services to enable data-driven decision-making. Technically, the website employs modern analytics and consent management tools, hosted on Google Cloud infrastructure, but suffers from slow load times and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical security flaw. The security posture is moderate with good domain protection and DMARC enforcement but requires urgent remediation of TLS and certificate issues. Privacy compliance is robust with clear cookie consent mechanisms and GDPR adherence. Overall, Coupler.io demonstrates strong business credibility and professional web presence but must address its SSL/TLS deficiencies to improve security and trust.

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

4 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

  3. DNS health

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

    • High

      Unregistered MX Record

      MX record points to unregistered domain: wukmjotkatkemclmlhmv2cpezjxvgpjpwiudiprqcgurz5xve3da.mx-verification.google.com

      What to do: Remove or fix MX record pointing to unregistered domain

      • RFC 5321 §5.1
      • NIS2 21(2)(i)
      • IR 2024/2690 12.4: Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 12.4: Asset inventory
      • NIST CM-8: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-8: System Component Inventory

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

Keep watching coupler.io

This scan found 18 issues across 5 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
100
Security headers
65
Email security
80
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
76

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

Coupler.io operates in the technology sector as a data integration and reporting SaaS provider. Its competitive advantage lies in its extensive app connectors, ease of use for non-technical users, and strong customer satisfaction. The business model is subscription-based with free and paid tiers, targeting mid-sized businesses and agencies. Revenue streams likely include subscriptions and consulting services. The company benefits from a partnership ecosystem including Railsware and related products like Mailtrap. Growth indicators include a large user base and high ratings on review platforms. Strategic observations highlight the importance of maintaining security and performance to sustain market position.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate but compromised by the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing users to potential interception risks. The domain is well-protected with registrar locks and a strict DMARC policy, reducing email spoofing risks. Cookie consent and privacy policies are well-implemented, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the lack of OCSP stapling and session resumption indicates room for improvement in TLS performance and security. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident, suggesting a gap in security governance. Overall, the security culture appears proactive but requires urgent technical fixes to TLS configuration.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable secure HTTPS connections.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable legacy protocols to enhance security.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve TLS performance and security.
  4. Establish and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern tech stack including Ruby on Rails, Google Tag Manager, PostHog analytics, and Cookiebot for consent management. Hosting is provided by Google Cloud, ensuring scalability and reliability. The site uses multiple third-party integrations for marketing and analytics, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. However, the page load time is slow with a large page size, indicating potential technical debt or unoptimized assets. Accessibility and SEO are well addressed, and the site is mobile responsive. Technical risks include the lack of valid SSL and disabled TLS protocols, which could impact user trust and search rankings. Modernization efforts should focus on security hardening and performance optimization.
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 coupler.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 coupler.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.