Skip to main content

Security report for deadlinefunnel.com

CyberPanda s.r.o - Deadline Funnel · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Deadline Funnel is a SaaS company specializing in authentic evergreen marketing funnels that create real urgency through personalized deadlines for leads. The platform integrates with various email and marketing tools, serving a broad audience of online marketers and digital creators. The website is professionally designed, content-rich, and well-structured, reflecting a mature digital presence with extensive customer testimonials and case studies. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern frameworks and includes multiple analytics and marketing integrations, indicating a high level of digital maturity. Security posture is good with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA usage, though explicit security headers could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable concern, slightly impacting domain trustworthiness. Overall, the site presents a strong business and technical profile with minor areas for security enhancement.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of deadlinefunnel.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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

5 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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. 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 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 deadlinefunnel.com

This scan found 19 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
73

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

Deadline Funnel holds a solid market position as a trusted tool for marketers seeking to increase conversions via urgency-driven funnels. Its business model is subscription-based SaaS, targeting creators and businesses running email campaigns and sales funnels. The company has generated significant sales volume and maintains a consistent brand image supported by strong social proof and third-party reviews. The ecosystem includes integrations with major email platforms and marketing tools, enhancing its competitive advantage. The lack of direct contact information on the site suggests a focus on digital self-service and automated support. The suspicious WHOIS data and presence of one suspicious external domain warrant monitoring but do not currently undermine the overall business credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security baseline with enforced HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA, and no visible exposure of sensitive data. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options is a gap that could be exploited. The inclusion of multiple third-party scripts increases the attack surface and necessitates regular security audits. No vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected in the content. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. Overall, the security posture is solid but could benefit from enhanced header policies and published security practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce explicit security headers including CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Regularly audit and vet all third-party scripts and external domains to mitigate supply chain risks.
  4. Add visible company contact information including verified emails and phone numbers to improve trust and compliance.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data to improve domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CyberPanda s.r.o - Deadline Funnel
Description
Create an evergreen marketing funnel with Deadline Funnel. Integrates with your existing marketing software and used by thousands of marketers to create real urgency.
Key services
Evergreen marketing funnels, Email countdown timers, Website pop-up widgets, Sales page countdown timers, Email automation integrations, Campaign analytics and tracking
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.7.2, jQuery 3.7.1, UIkit 3.21.16, Google Fonts (Roboto), Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Bing Ads, Microsoft Clarity, Wistia video embeds, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO), Wicked Reports widget, Google reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
UIkit, WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and analytics scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Microsoft Clarity, Visual Website Optimizer, Facebook Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Bing Ads, Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, Visual Website Optimizer
Marketing tools
Wicked Reports, Zapier, Make
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia
  2. Professional marketing SaaS platform with strong branding
  3. Multiple customer testimonials and case studies present
  4. Comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms policies linked
  5. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  6. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on main pages
  7. WHOIS data unavailable, which is a concern for domain legitimacy
  8. Presence of one suspicious external domain in scripts (g10894638425.co)
  9. Strong social media presence with official accounts linked
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS with UIkit framework and uses a variety of third-party analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity, and Visual Website Optimizer. It employs responsive design and multimedia content including embedded videos from Wistia and YouTube. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and use of CDN-hosted resources. Accessibility features are basic and could be enhanced. SEO is well implemented with proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. The technical infrastructure supports a professional SaaS marketing platform but should address security header gaps and monitor third-party script risks.
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. 73/100Medium27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with deadlinefunnel.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 deadlinefunnel.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.