Skip to main content

Security report for datadome.co

Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website datadome.co is currently inaccessible due to a CAPTCHA challenge page served via an iframe from captcha-delivery.com, indicating the presence of a Web Application Firewall (WAF) or bot mitigation service. This prevents direct access to the website's actual content, business information, or security policies. As a result, no metadata, forms, contact details, or structured data could be extracted or analyzed. The site appears to be a technology-focused entity, likely in the security domain, but no explicit business or service descriptions are available from the provided content. The technical infrastructure includes JavaScript and external CAPTCHA services, but no further details on hosting, CMS, or analytics are visible. Security posture cannot be fully assessed due to lack of accessible content, but the presence of a WAF suggests a proactive security approach. Overall, the site’s risk assessment is limited by content blocking, and strategic recommendations focus on enabling access for proper evaluation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

7 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

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

Keep watching datadome.co

This scan found 20 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. See sample alerts.

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
57
Security headers
35
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
69

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

Due to the content being blocked by a CAPTCHA challenge, detailed business intelligence is unavailable. The domain is privacy protected, which is common for security companies, and no suspicious WHOIS patterns were detected. The company likely operates in the technology sector, possibly providing security or bot mitigation services. No information on market positioning, revenue streams, or partnerships could be determined from the provided data.

Security posture

The website employs a CAPTCHA challenge mechanism, indicating use of a WAF or bot mitigation service, which is a positive security control. However, no security headers, policies, or incident response contacts are visible. The lack of accessible content prevents a full security maturity assessment. No vulnerabilities or compliance gaps can be identified from the provided data. The domain’s privacy protection is justified given the business type. Overall, the security posture appears cautious but cannot be fully validated.

Recommendations

  1. Allow access to at least a basic landing page without CAPTCHA to enable content and security analysis.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and trust.
  3. Provide visible contact information including security incident response contacts.
  4. Implement security headers and disclose security certifications to enhance security posture transparency.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to support responsible disclosure.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is a CAPTCHA challenge page served via iframe from captcha-delivery.com, indicating a WAF or bot protection mechanism blocking direct content access. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Stack
JavaScript

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is fully blocked behind a CAPTCHA challenge.
  2. No visible business or contact information on the landing page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided HTML.
  4. External domains are related to CAPTCHA delivery services.
  5. No analytics or advertising scripts detected in the provided content.
  6. No forms or input fields detected in the provided HTML.
  7. No metadata, Open Graph, or structured data found in the provided HTML.
  8. Website likely uses a WAF or bot mitigation service to protect content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website’s technical implementation cannot be fully assessed due to content blocking by a CAPTCHA challenge. The visible content includes JavaScript and iframe elements loading CAPTCHA services from captcha-delivery.com. No CMS, hosting provider, or analytics tools are detectable. Performance, SEO, accessibility, and mobile optimization cannot be evaluated. The use of a WAF or bot mitigation service is evident, which is a positive security control but limits content visibility and analysis.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 69/100 +1Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 68/100 −2Medium30 findingsView report
  3. 70/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with datadome.co. 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 datadome.co.

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.