Skip to main content

Security report for deadlinefunnel.com

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 integrate with existing marketing software to create real urgency for online offers. The company targets online marketers, creators, and digital businesses, providing tools such as email countdown timers, website pop-ups, and campaign analytics. The website demonstrates a strong market position with over 20,000 creators and $100 million in sales generated since 2017. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like UIkit and optimized for performance and mobile responsiveness. Security posture is good with HTTPS and some best practices, though explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms could be improved. WHOIS data is unavailable publicly, likely due to privacy protection, which is common for SaaS businesses. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-optimized, with room for enhanced privacy compliance.

Scanned

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 operates in the technology sector, providing marketing automation tools focused on urgency and deadline-driven campaigns. Their business model is subscription-based SaaS, targeting digital marketers and creators. The company leverages integrations with major email platforms and marketing tools, enhancing its ecosystem. The presence of case studies, testimonials, and third-party review logos strengthens its credibility. The company appears medium-sized with a consistent brand and excellent content quality. The lack of public WHOIS data is offset by strong digital presence and social proof. Strategic partnerships with analytics and marketing platforms support its growth and operational efficiency.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration, uses caching and performance optimization tools, and integrates third-party analytics and marketing scripts responsibly. However, explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Referrer-Policy are not evident, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no visible cookie consent mechanism. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved with additional headers and privacy controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce a comprehensive Content-Security-Policy header to mitigate XSS and related attacks.
  2. Add security headers such as X-Frame-Options and Referrer-Policy to enhance browser security.
  3. Deploy a visible cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Publish clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to avoid vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
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 countdown timers, Pop-up widgets, Campaign tracking and analytics, Integrations with major email platforms
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, jQuery, UIkit CSS framework, Google Tag Manager, Wistia video embeds, WebP Express for image optimization, WP Rocket for caching and performance
Frameworks
UIkit
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of nonce attributes in scripts
  • Lazy loading and deferred scripts to reduce attack surface

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Wicked Reports
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Wicked Reports
Marketing tools
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. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  3. Strong SEO and metadata implementation
  4. Multiple social media and third-party integrations
  5. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage
  6. Privacy and terms of service pages are present and linked
  7. No explicit cookie consent banner detected
  8. WHOIS data is not publicly available, likely privacy protected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using UIkit CSS framework and jQuery libraries, with performance optimizations via WP Rocket and WebP Express for images. It uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing integrations, including Wistia for video hosting. The site is well-structured with proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data for SEO. Lazy loading and deferred script loading improve performance. Hosting provider is not explicitly identified. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO practices. Technical risks are minimal but include reliance on multiple third-party scripts which require ongoing security monitoring.
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.