Skip to main content

Security report for endorsal.io

Endorsal · Technology · United States

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

Endorsal is a SaaS company specializing in automating the collection, display, and sharing of customer testimonials and reviews. The platform integrates with major review sites and CMS/e-commerce platforms, offering features such as custom forms, automated review requests, and embeddable widgets. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image, targeting businesses across multiple sectors including local businesses, SaaS, e-commerce, and restaurants. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks like Bootstrap and integrates numerous analytics and marketing tools, hosted primarily on AWS infrastructure. Security posture is good with HTTPS and domain protections, though DNSSEC is not enabled and security headers are not evident. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-positioned in its market segment.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of endorsal.io. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching endorsal.io

This scan found 21 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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
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

Endorsal targets a broad business audience seeking to leverage social proof to increase conversions and brand loyalty. Its competitive advantage lies in automation and integration capabilities with popular platforms. The business model is subscription-based SaaS with a focus on ease of use and quick setup. The company has a growing user base of over 8,700 companies, indicating market traction. The ecosystem includes partnerships with major review platforms and CMS providers. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to enhance privacy compliance and security transparency to strengthen trust further.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with enforced HTTPS and domain status protections. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers indicates room for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The lack of published security policies or incident response contacts suggests limited transparency in security governance. Compliance with GDPR and other regulations is unclear due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a SaaS marketing platform but could benefit from enhanced controls and disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  4. Provide clear security incident response contact information and consider publishing a security.txt file.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and marketing tools to minimize security risks and improve privacy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Endorsal
Description
Endorsal fully automates online customer reviews by importing reviews from Google, Facebook, and more. It offers automatic review requests and beautiful testimonial widgets.
Key services
EndoForms - Custom testimonial capture forms, AutoRequests - Automated review requests via email and SMS, SuperLinks - Pre-fill forms with customer data, ReviewHQ - Floating review widget, Widgets - Display reviews on any website, Wall of Love - Infinite page of reviews, FOMO Popups - Timely notifications, Import from other platforms (Google, Facebook, Yelp, Tripadvisor, etc.), Review Marketing - Automatic sharing to social networks
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 4.3, jQuery 3.4.1, FontAwesome icons, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Quora Pixel, Twitter Universal Website Tag, Segment Analytics, Mixpanel, FirstPromoter, eWebinar widget, Endorsal custom widgets and scripts
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by https URLs)
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and clientTransferProhibited
  • No DNSSEC enabled (potential improvement area)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Segment, Mixpanel
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Facebook Ads, Twitter Ads, Quora Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Quora Pixel, Twitter Universal Website Tag, Mixpanel, Segment Analytics
Marketing tools
Segment, Mixpanel, FirstPromoter, eWebinar
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional SaaS platform for testimonial automation.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found in the main HTML content.
  3. Extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing scripts.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the main page.
  5. Domain uses privacy protection but is consistent with business claims.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  7. Good integration with major review platforms and CMS/e-commerce platforms.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack including Bootstrap 4.3, jQuery, and FontAwesome, combined with multiple third-party analytics and marketing integrations such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight, Quora Pixel, Twitter tags, Segment, and Mixpanel. Hosting is primarily on AWS with Cloudfront CDN usage. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, with deferred loading of CSS and scripts. Accessibility features are basic but present. Technical risks include reliance on numerous third-party scripts which may impact privacy and security if not managed properly.
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. 73/100Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 73/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with endorsal.io. 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 endorsal.io.

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.