Skip to main content

Security report for extract.to

Extract · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

67/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Extract is a technology company specializing in efficient ELT and data pipeline solutions powered by Rust. Positioned as a cost-effective and high-performance alternative to competitors like Fivetran and Airbyte, Extract targets data teams and enterprises seeking flexible, transparent, and scalable data movement platforms. The website reflects a mature SaaS business model with strong emphasis on usability, performance, and security compliance, notably SOC 2 certification. The technical infrastructure leverages WordPress CMS with modern SEO and analytics tools, ensuring fast performance and excellent mobile optimization. Security posture is robust with HTTPS, encryption, and granular access controls, though improvements in privacy compliance and incident response transparency are recommended. Overall, Extract presents a professional and trustworthy digital presence aligned with its market positioning.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
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

6 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 extract.to

This scan found 24 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
67

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

Extract operates in the competitive data integration and ELT market, focusing on delivering superior performance and cost savings through Rust-based pipelines. Its business model is SaaS with a focus on enterprise customers and data teams. The company differentiates itself with radical transparency, real-time monitoring, and built-in reverse ETL capabilities. Customer testimonials and SOC 2 compliance enhance credibility. The marketing ecosystem includes HubSpot and Google Ads, supporting lead generation and customer engagement. The absence of direct contact emails and phone numbers suggests a controlled sales funnel primarily via demo requests and contact forms. Extract's partner ecosystem is not explicitly detailed, but the presence of multiple client logos indicates a broad customer base.

Security posture

Extract demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, SOC 2 compliance, end-to-end encryption, and granular access controls. The website does not expose sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. However, the lack of a published vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file and absence of explicit incident response contacts represent areas for improvement. The presence of multiple third-party scripts (HubSpot, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel) introduces moderate tracking but no evident security risks. Overall, the security practices align well with industry standards for SaaS platforms, supporting trust and data protection.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a visible cookie consent banner to enhance privacy compliance and user transparency.
  2. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve security transparency and community engagement.
  3. Provide explicit incident response contact information to facilitate timely reporting and handling of security issues.
  4. Consider adding data protection officer contact details if applicable to strengthen GDPR compliance.
  5. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize security and privacy risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Extract
Description
Extract delivers the world’s most efficient ELT & data pipelines—fast, affordable, and Rust-powered. Offers lightning-fast, flexible data movement with an intuitive UI, powerful APIs, and rock-solid debugging at affordable rates.
Key services
ELT data pipelines, Reverse ETL, Data movement automation, Real-time monitoring and logging
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Rust, WordPress, Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot, Google Analytics
Frameworks
Gutenberg (WordPress block editor)
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • SOC 2 compliance
  • End-to-end encryption
  • Granular access controls
  • No third-party data exposure

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, HubSpot Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
HubSpot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Strong focus on performance, cost efficiency, and transparency.
  3. Good use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  4. SOC 2 compliance is a key trust indicator.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via forms only.
  6. No visible cookie consent banner despite tracking scripts present.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  8. Social media presence on X (Twitter) and LinkedIn confirmed.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the Gutenberg block editor and Yoast SEO plugin, ensuring modern content management and SEO optimization. The tech stack includes Rust for backend ELT pipelines, indicating a focus on performance and efficiency. The site uses Google Tag Manager, HubSpot, and Facebook Pixel for analytics and marketing automation. Performance is fast with good mobile responsiveness and accessibility features. No technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit but the site uses CDN and modern web standards. Opportunities exist to enhance privacy mechanisms and incident response visibility.
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 extract.to. 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 extract.to.

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.