Skip to main content

Security report for crowdsignal.com

Automattic · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Crowdsignal is a mature and well-established SaaS platform specializing in creating surveys, polls, quizzes, and ratings, backed by Automattic, the company behind WordPress.com. The website clearly targets businesses and individuals seeking flexible and powerful survey tools, offering a comprehensive suite of features including customization, sharing, analytics, and data export. The brand benefits from strong market positioning due to its association with Automattic and WordPress.com, enhancing trust and reliability. Technically, the website is built on the WordPress.com platform using modern technologies such as Jetpack, Gutenberg, and FontAwesome. It employs Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for data collection and marketing optimization. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, accessibility, and SEO, reflecting a high level of digital maturity. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS, uses domain status locks to prevent unauthorized transfers or deletions, and implements cookie consent mechanisms compliant with GDPR. However, it lacks DNSSEC and explicit security policies or vulnerability disclosure pages, which are areas for improvement. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, Crowdsignal presents a low-risk profile with strong business credibility, good privacy compliance, and a professional online presence. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing security and incident response policies, and providing a vulnerability disclosure channel to further enhance trust and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching crowdsignal.com

This scan found 18 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
52
Security headers
45
Email security
87
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
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

Crowdsignal operates as a SaaS provider in the technology sector, focusing on survey and polling solutions. Its competitive advantage lies in its integration with WordPress.com and backing by Automattic, providing a stable and trusted platform. The business model is subscription-based with free trials, targeting a broad audience from individual users to enterprises. The company demonstrates growth through continuous feature enhancements and strong customer support via its 'Happiness Engineers'. Partnerships with WordPress.com and use of Google marketing and analytics tools indicate a mature marketing ecosystem. The absence of direct phone contacts suggests a digital-first customer engagement approach. The website content and branding are consistent and professional, supporting a high level of business credibility.

Security posture

The security posture of Crowdsignal is solid, with HTTPS enforced site-wide and domain registration protections in place. The site uses cookie consent banners aligned with GDPR requirements and employs reputable analytics and advertising services with privacy considerations. However, the absence of DNSSEC and lack of published security policies or incident response information represent gaps in transparency and defense-in-depth. No signs of vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive information were found in the HTML content. The site uses nonce tokens for form security and avoids exposing sensitive data. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be improved by adding explicit security documentation and DNSSEC.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the crowdsignal.com domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to improve transparency and user trust.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to harden the website.
  5. Continue to maintain and improve cookie consent mechanisms and privacy compliance to align with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Automattic
Description
Create flexible surveys, polls, quizzes and ratings with Crowdsignal.
Key services
Surveys, Polls, Quizzes, Ratings, Data export and analytics
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress.com platform, Jetpack plugin, Gutenberg editor, FontAwesome icons, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google Ads, JavaScript ES6 modules
Frameworks
Jetpack, Gutenberg
Platforms
WordPress.com
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientDeleteProhibited, clientTransferProhibited, clientUpdateProhibited domain status
  • No DNSSEC enabled (not ideal but mitigated by other controls)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with nonce tokens
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, WordPress.com Stats
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Tracking pixels
WordPress.com Stats
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Content is comprehensive and clearly targeted at businesses and individuals needing survey tools.
  3. Strong association with Automattic and WordPress.com enhances trust.
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present and comprehensive.
  5. No direct phone numbers or emails found; contact is via forms and support pages.
  6. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  7. No security policy or incident response page explicitly found.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. No DNSSEC enabled on domain, which is a minor security gap.
  10. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with customization options.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on WordPress.com infrastructure managed by Automattic, leveraging the Jetpack plugin suite and Gutenberg editor for content management. It uses modern JavaScript modules, FontAwesome icons, and video content for rich user experience. Performance is optimized with asynchronous script loading and preloading of key assets. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags including Open Graph and Twitter Cards. Accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA roles are present. Analytics and marketing tools include Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Google Ads integration. The technical stack is modern and well-maintained, supporting a fast and responsive user experience with minimal technical debt.
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 crowdsignal.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 crowdsignal.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.