Skip to main content

Security report for daopay.com

DaoPay GmbH · Finance · Austria

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

DaoPay GmbH is a licensed Austrian payment service provider offering a broad range of secure and simple payment solutions for online merchants globally. The company supports over 80 payment methods including major credit cards, PayPal, SEPA, and direct carrier billing, positioning itself as a comprehensive payment gateway and merchant account provider. Their target audience includes online businesses seeking to expand payment options and increase customer convenience. The website is professionally designed with clear navigation and relevant content, supporting a medium-sized enterprise profile in the finance and technology sectors. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins and frameworks such as Bootstrap and Visual Composer, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. However, performance is slow and accessibility is basic. The site is mobile optimized and SEO is well implemented. Security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and outdated TLS protocols, which poses significant risks for a payment service provider. Privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with explicit consent mechanisms in place. The WHOIS data confirms the legitimacy and consistency of the domain registration with the business claims. Social media presence and contact information are comprehensive, enhancing business credibility. Strategic recommendations include immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues, enabling modern security protocols, and enhancing DNS security configurations to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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

5 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

    • 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

  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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

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

Keep watching daopay.com

This scan found 17 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
50
Email security
50
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
49

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

DaoPay operates in the competitive payment service provider market, leveraging a wide portfolio of payment methods to attract diverse online merchants. Their licensing by the Austrian Financial Market Authority is a key trust signal. The business model focuses on payment processing and merchant services, with additional loyalty programs like DaoPoints to enhance customer retention. Partnerships with payment method providers such as paysafecard, PayPal, and Kalixa strengthen their ecosystem. The company targets medium-sized businesses and e-commerce platforms seeking global payment acceptance. Growth indicators include active social media engagement and continuous website updates. The presence of self-registration and API integration options suggests a scalable and developer-friendly approach.

Security posture

The current security posture reveals critical gaps, notably the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which undermine secure communications and customer trust. While security headers like HSTS and Content Security Policy are implemented, the absence of modern encryption and session management features is concerning for a payment service provider. No incident response or security policy pages were found, indicating potential gaps in security governance and transparency. The website complies with GDPR in terms of privacy and cookie consent but lacks advanced email security measures such as DMARC. Immediate attention to SSL/TLS deployment and DNS security enhancements is essential to mitigate risks.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure data transmission.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable insecure legacy protocols.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  4. Add DMARC DNS records and enable DNSSEC to strengthen email and DNS security.
  5. Develop and publish a formal security policy and incident response plan to enhance transparency and preparedness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
DaoPay GmbH
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a WordPress CMS with multiple plugins including Yoast SEO, Visual Composer, Slider Revolution, and Magee Shortcodes, indicating a feature-rich but potentially complex environment. The tech stack includes Apache server and jQuery libraries. Performance metrics are poor with zero load time and resource data, suggesting incomplete measurement or slow loading. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility is basic. The site uses multiple external resources from Google Fonts, FontAwesome, and social media platforms. Technical debt is evident in outdated WordPress version (4.9.26) and lack of SSL/TLS, which could impact business operations and customer trust.
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 daopay.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 daopay.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.