Security report for doctolib.com

Name: Dark-web exposure summary for doctolib.com
Creator: OffSeq Breach

Doctolib · Healthcare · France

High risk. 17 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Doctolib is a leading European healthcare technology company specializing in online appointment booking and teleconsultation services. The platform serves patients and healthcare professionals primarily in France, Germany, and Italy, offering a seamless way to find specialists and manage medical appointments. The company also provides professional management software for healthcare providers, enhancing operational efficiency. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive legal, privacy, and user support documentation, reinforcing trust and compliance with GDPR regulations. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React, Sentry for error tracking, Datadog for real user monitoring, and advanced consent management via Didomi. The infrastructure leverages Cloudflare services for security and performance, with strong SSL/TLS configurations and security headers implemented. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, providing a fast and user-friendly experience. From a security perspective, Doctolib demonstrates robust practices such as HTTPS enforcement, cookie security with SameSite and Partitioned flags, and CAPTCHA integration to mitigate abuse. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data limits full domain legitimacy verification, though the overall trust signals and professional branding mitigate this concern. Overall, Doctolib presents a secure, compliant, and professionally managed online platform with strong market positioning in healthcare technology. Strategic recommendations include enhancing transparency with a published security.txt file and continuous monitoring of third-party dependencies to maintain security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view: 85/ 100 · Low
Checks completed: 7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
(b) Incident handling: One indicator
(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
(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

17 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

Network security
Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: Telnet
  Port 23 (Telnet) is publicly accessible - Telnet - Unencrypted remote access
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to Telnet using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: SMB
  Port 445 (SMB) is publicly accessible - SMB - Windows file sharing, high risk
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to SMB using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: MSSQL
  Port 1433 (MSSQL) is publicly accessible - MSSQL - Database server
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to MSSQL using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: Oracle
  Port 1521 (Oracle) is publicly accessible - Oracle - Database server
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to Oracle using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: MySQL
  Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: RDP
  Port 3389 (RDP) is publicly accessible - RDP - Remote Desktop, prime ransomware target
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to RDP using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL
  Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: Redis
  Port 6379 (Redis) is publicly accessible - Redis - In-memory database
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to Redis using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- Critical
  Critical Service Exposed: MongoDB
  Port 27017 (MongoDB) is publicly accessible - MongoDB - NoSQL database
  What to do: Immediately restrict access to MongoDB using firewall or VPN
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- High
  High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP
  Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer
  What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- High
  High-Risk Service Exposed: RPC
  Port 135 (RPC) is publicly accessible - RPC - Windows RPC endpoint
  What to do: Consider restricting access to RPC or implementing strong authentication
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- High
  High-Risk Service Exposed: NetBIOS
  Port 139 (NetBIOS) is publicly accessible - NetBIOS - Windows file sharing
  What to do: Consider restricting access to NetBIOS or implementing strong authentication
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
- High
  High-Risk Service Exposed: Elasticsearch
  Port 9200 (Elasticsearch) is publicly accessible - Elasticsearch - Search engine
  What to do: Consider restricting access to Elasticsearch or implementing strong authentication
  References
  - NIS2 21(2)(e)
  - IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
  - NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
  - NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
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"
  References
  - CWE-319
  - OWASP A04:2025
  - ASVS V3.4.1
  - RFC 6797 §6.1.1
  - Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: hsts_min_age 63072000
  - NIS2 21(2)(h)
  - IR 2024/2690 9.2(a): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(a): Cryptography
  - NIST SC-8: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-8: Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
- 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
  References
  - 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';…
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
  References
  - GDPR Art. 7
  - ePrivacy Art. 5(3)
  - NIST PT-4: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 PT-4: Consent
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
  References
  - CWE-326
  - OWASP A04:2025
  - Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048
  - NIS2 21(2)(h)
  - IR 2024/2690 9.2(b): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(b): Cryptography
  - NIST SC-13: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-13: Cryptographic Protection

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

Keep watching doctolib.com

This scan found 24 issues across 5 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: 70
Security headers: 55
Email security: 100
DNS health: 85
Network security: 0
GDPR outside view: 85
Average: 66
After the cap: 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 · found on this site
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention doctolib.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records: 230
Employees: 0
Customers: 20
Third parties: 210
Weak passwords: 7%

4 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for doctolib.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach Monitor on Breach

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Doctolib holds a strong market position as a premier healthcare appointment platform in Europe, particularly in France. Its business model combines B2C patient services with B2B offerings for healthcare professionals, generating revenue through subscription software and telehealth services. The company targets a broad customer base including patients seeking medical appointments and healthcare providers needing efficient practice management tools. Growth indicators include multi-country presence and integration with major payment processors and CRM platforms. Partnerships with Salesforce and Zendesk enhance customer relationship management and support. The company’s B Corp certification signals commitment to social and environmental responsibility, strengthening brand reputation.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, modern security headers, and advanced cookie management aligned with upcoming browser standards. Use of nonce attributes for inline scripts and integration of consent management tools demonstrate compliance with privacy regulations. The presence of CAPTCHA services reduces automated abuse risks. No direct evidence of vulnerabilities or data leaks was found. However, the lack of a publicly available security policy or incident response contact limits transparency. The missing WHOIS data is a minor concern but likely due to privacy protection or registry policies. Overall, the security maturity is high with room for improvement in disclosure and incident readiness.

Recommendations

Publish a security.txt file to provide clear vulnerability disclosure and incident response contacts.
Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and SDKs to mitigate emerging vulnerabilities.
Enhance transparency by publishing a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
Continue evolving cookie and consent management to comply with evolving browser privacy standards.
Implement and publicize a data retention and deletion policy to strengthen GDPR compliance and user trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses

Doctolib, 54 quai Charles Pasqua, 92300 Levallois-Perret (map, opens in a new tab)

Legal name

Doctolib

Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company: Doctolib
Description: Doctolib is a healthcare technology company providing an online platform to find specialists and book medical appointments quickly and easily.
Key services: Online appointment booking, Teleconsultation services, Healthcare professional management software (Doctolib Pro), Patient health record management
Content quality: excellent
Branding: consistent

Technology

Stack: React, JavaScript, Sentry, Datadog RUM, Didomi Consent SDK, Cloudflare Turnstile (captcha), Stripe (payment processing), Adyen (payment processing), FriendlyCaptcha
Frameworks: React
Platforms: Web, Mobile (iOS and Android apps referenced)
Performance: fast
Mobile: excellent
Accessibility: good
SEO: good

Security

Observed score

90/100

Good practices seen

HTTPS enforced
Use of nonce for inline scripts
Third-party cookie management with SameSite and Partitioned flags
Consent management via Didomi
Use of captcha (Cloudflare Turnstile and FriendlyCaptcha) to prevent abuse

Analytics and tracking

Services: Datadog RUM, Sentry
Tracking level: moderate
Privacy practices: good

Advertising

Tracking pixels: Datadog RUM, Sentry
Marketing tools: Didomi Consent SDK, WalkMe
Transparency: good

Site quality

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

Key observations

Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design
Strong focus on healthcare appointment booking and teleconsultation
Comprehensive legal and privacy documentation present
Multiple social media and community links indicate active engagement
Use of modern web technologies and security best practices
No WHOIS data available, limiting domain registration trust verification
No signs of adult or inappropriate content
No visible security vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data

Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React-based frontend with extensive use of JavaScript and asynchronous loading for performance optimization. It integrates multiple third-party services including Sentry for error monitoring, Datadog for real user monitoring, and Didomi for consent management. Payment processing is handled via Stripe and Adyen, indicating robust e-commerce capabilities. Hosting and CDN services appear to be provided by Cloudflare, ensuring fast global delivery and security features. The site is mobile-optimized and includes accessibility considerations. Technical debt appears minimal with continuous deployment indicated by versioning metadata. Opportunities exist to enhance technical documentation and security transparency.

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.

OWASP Top 10:2025 (opens in a new tab)2025 (membership per CWE 4.20) · CC BY-SA 4.0
OWASP ASVS (opens in a new tab)5.0.0 · CC BY-SA 4.0
OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (opens in a new tab)latest (checklist.json, master) · CC BY-SA 4.0
OWASP Secure Headers Project (opens in a new tab)2026-10-18 · Apache-2.0
Mozilla Server Side TLS (intermediate) (opens in a new tab)6.0 · MPL-2.0
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 (OSCAL catalog) (opens in a new tab)5.2.0 · Public domain (US Government work)
Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 333, 27.12.2022 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 (opens in a new tab)OJ L, 18.10.2024 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Directive 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy), consolidated (opens in a new tab)19.12.2009 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
RFC Editor metadata (opens in a new tab)per-RFC (obsolete RFCs rejected) · IETF Trust Legal Provisions (metadata only)
NIST CSRC, W3C TR, IETF Datatracker, EDPB, EUR-Lex CELLAR and gesetze-bayern.de (opens in a new tab)per document · Titles and links only
W3C WCAG 2.2 (opens in a new tab)W3C Recommendation (wcag.json) · W3C Software and Document License
Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 151, 7.6.2019 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Directive (EU) 2016/2102 (Web Accessibility Directive) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 327, 2.12.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Priority findings

Network security

Critical Service Exposed: Telnet

Critical Service Exposed: SMB

Critical Service Exposed: MSSQL

Critical Service Exposed: Oracle

Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

Critical Service Exposed: RDP

Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

Critical Service Exposed: Redis

Critical Service Exposed: MongoDB

High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

High-Risk Service Exposed: RPC

High-Risk Service Exposed: NetBIOS

High-Risk Service Exposed: Elasticsearch

Security headers

Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

Missing Content-Security-Policy header

GDPR outside view

No Cookie Consent Banner found

SSL/TLS

Weak SSL Key Length

Keep watching doctolib.com

Daily monitoring

Full report

Results by check

Security headers, 4 findings, score 55/100

SSL/TLS, 3 findings, score 70/100

Email security, No findings, score 100/100

DNS health, 2 findings, score 85/100

Network security, 14 findings, score 0/100

GDPR outside view, 1 finding, score 85/100

NIS2 outside view, Earlier method, rescan for details · not counted in the security score–