Skip to main content

Security report for filecamp.com

Filecamp · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Filecamp is a cloud-based Digital Asset Management (DAM) SaaS provider targeting marketing professionals and businesses that require centralized management of digital marketing assets such as images, videos, and brand guidelines. The company positions itself as an easy-to-use platform trusted by global clients including Coca-Cola, Unilever, and HBO. The website reflects a mature digital presence built on WordPress with modern marketing and analytics tools integrated, indicating a solid technical infrastructure. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though explicit security policies and incident response information are absent. Privacy compliance is limited due to missing privacy and cookie policies, which could be improved to meet GDPR and other regulations. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy, with clear business focus and good user experience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. 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 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching filecamp.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. 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
0
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
58

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

Filecamp operates in the technology sector providing DAM and media library solutions via a SaaS model. Its market positioning leverages ease of use and brand trust from notable clients. The business model focuses on subscription plans with unlimited users and features like online proofing and brand guidelines. The website content and client logos suggest a medium-sized company with a global reach. The absence of detailed contact information and privacy policies indicates areas for operational transparency improvement. The company maintains active social media channels, enhancing its marketing ecosystem. Growth indicators include a large user base and multiple country presence. Strategic partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident from the data.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses asynchronous loading of analytics and marketing scripts, which is good practice. However, no security headers were detected in the provided data, and there is no public security policy or incident response contact information. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present, which limits transparency for security researchers. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also suggests compliance gaps. Overall, the security posture is moderate to good but could be enhanced by publishing explicit security and incident response policies, implementing security headers, and improving privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Implement and expose security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing clear company contact information including emails and phone numbers.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Filecamp
Description
Lightweight, cloud-based Digital Asset Management trusted by global clients like Coca-Cola, Unilever & HBO. Manage all your digital marketing assets with a sleek, user friendly cloud platform.
Key services
Digital Asset Management, Media Library Software, File Sharing Platform, Online Proofing & Approval, Brand Asset Management, Online Brand Guidelines
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Slider Revolution, Google Analytics, Bing Ads, Microsoft Clarity, Google Tag Manager
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • Use of Google Tag Manager and analytics scripts asynchronously

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Bing Ads
Transparency
basic

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 digital asset management.
  2. Content is rich and well-structured with clear calls to action.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found on the homepage or main navigation.
  4. No visible contact emails or phone numbers on the homepage content.
  5. Social media presence is linked and consistent with brand identity.
  6. Use of modern analytics and marketing tools is evident.
  7. No security policy or incident response information publicly available.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Slider Revolution plugin for rich media display. It integrates Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Bing Ads, and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site uses modern fonts from Google Fonts and asynchronous script loading for performance. The design is responsive and mobile-optimized with good SEO meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. Performance is moderate with caching plugins indicated. There is no explicit hosting provider identified. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts which require regular security audits. The site lacks advanced accessibility features but meets basic standards.
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. 69/100Medium27 findings · partial scanView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with filecamp.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 filecamp.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.