Skip to main content

Security report for equals.com

Equals · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 4 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

Equals is a technology company specializing in providing an all-in-one GTM analytics platform that integrates with Salesforce, HubSpot, Stripe, and SQL databases to deliver real-time insights on pipeline and ARR. Positioned as a trusted solution for RevOps, founders, and finance teams, Equals emphasizes clarity and actionable revenue insights to drive business growth. The company maintains a professional online presence with consistent branding and customer testimonials, reinforcing its market position in the SaaS analytics space. Technically, the website is hosted on Netlify and leverages modern JavaScript technologies, Google Tag Manager, and Intercom for analytics and customer engagement. While the site demonstrates good performance and mobile optimization, it lacks some advanced security configurations such as modern TLS protocols and DNSSEC. Security headers are properly implemented, and the SSL certificate is valid, but the absence of a cookie policy and explicit security or incident response policies indicates room for improvement. Overall, Equals exhibits a solid digital maturity with a focus on user experience and trust, though enhancements in security posture and compliance transparency would strengthen its risk management and customer confidence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

4 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 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

    • 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 equals.com

This scan found 18 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
62
Security headers
55
Email security
90
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
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

Equals operates in the technology sector with a SaaS business model focused on GTM analytics. Its competitive advantage lies in real-time data synchronization across multiple platforms, enabling actionable insights for revenue growth. The target customers include RevOps professionals, founders, and finance teams who require detailed pipeline and ARR analytics. The company leverages partnerships and integrations with major platforms like Salesforce and HubSpot, enhancing its ecosystem. Growth indicators include active customer testimonials and a diverse set of use cases presented on the website. The presence of career listings and documentation sites suggests organizational maturity and customer support infrastructure. Strategic observations highlight the importance of expanding security and compliance frameworks to meet evolving regulatory demands and customer expectations.

Security posture

The security posture of Equals is moderate with foundational best practices in place such as HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options headers, alongside a valid SSL certificate. However, the lack of support for modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and absence of DNSSEC and CAA records represent potential vulnerabilities that could be exploited. No explicit security policy, incident response plan, or designated contact channels for security issues were found, which may impact incident handling and regulatory compliance. The website does not implement a cookie consent mechanism, which could be a compliance gap under GDPR and similar regulations. Overall, while no critical vulnerabilities were detected, the security maturity would benefit from enhancements in encryption protocols, DNS security, and transparency around security governance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols to improve encryption security and compatibility.
  2. Implement DNSSEC and CAA DNS records to protect against DNS spoofing and unauthorized certificate issuance.
  3. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Introduce a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations such as GDPR.
  5. Regularly review and update security headers and conduct vulnerability assessments to maintain a strong security posture.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is modern and performant, hosted on Netlify with CDN capabilities. The technology stack includes JavaScript frameworks, Google Tag Manager for analytics, and Intercom for customer engagement. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and SEO, with structured data implemented for organization information. However, the absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or static site architecture. Performance metrics indicate fast load times, though no detailed resource counts were available. Technical debt appears low, but the lack of modern TLS support and DNS security features represent technical risks that could affect business continuity and customer trust. Opportunities exist to enhance security configurations and expand compliance documentation to align with industry best practices.
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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with equals.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 equals.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.