Skip to main content

Security report for files.fm

Files.fm · Technology · Latvia

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Files.fm is a well-established European cloud storage and file sharing platform founded in 2008, offering a range of services including secure file upload, sharing, digital content sales, and e-signature support. The platform targets both individual users and businesses, providing multiple subscription plans tailored to different storage and feature needs. Their market position is strengthened by a strong focus on GDPR compliance and European data center hosting, appealing to privacy-conscious customers. Technically, Files.fm employs a modern web stack with jQuery, Google and Matomo analytics, and Google reCAPTCHA for security. The site is mobile-optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional design. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforcement, two-factor authentication, and email validation, though improvements could be made by adding explicit security headers and a vulnerability disclosure policy. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and compliant with privacy regulations, making it a reliable service for cloud storage and file sharing needs.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of files.fm. 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

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 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 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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

  4. 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 files.fm

This scan found 26 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
42
Security headers
30
Email security
65
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
64

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

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 files.fm, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
10,344
Employees
3
Customers
10,270
Third parties
71
Weak passwords
19%

Latest record dated 2026-07-21 · 19 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 files.fm.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • su•••@files.fmfiles.fm2026-07-21
  • su•••@files.fmfiles.fm2026-07-13
  • su•••@files.fmfiles.fm2026-07-08

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Brand lookalikes

Add-on

Domains that imitate files.fm and could be used for phishing or spoofed email, tracked in OffSeq Breach.

Tracked
2
Registered
2
Resolving
2
High or critical
0

Last checked 2026-10-07

Masked preview

  • fi•••.fmMediumomission
  • fi•••••.comNot ratedvarious

See the full lookalike list

A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of files.fm with registration, mail-server, certificate and DNS signals.

Select it in the checkout above.

Lookalike data refreshes continuously. Monitoring on Breach alerts you when a variant is registered, gains a mail server or starts serving HTTPS.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Files.fm operates a freemium business model with free basic accounts and paid PRO and TEAM subscriptions offering enhanced storage, speed, and security features. The company leverages partnerships with European data centers and technology providers like Microsoft and e-shelter, enhancing its infrastructure credibility. Its ecosystem includes mobile and desktop apps, AI-powered content search, and integrations such as WebDAV and upload forms. The presence of social media channels and community features like public profiles and forums indicates active user engagement. The company’s longevity and consistent branding suggest stable operations and a solid market presence in the European cloud storage sector.

Security posture

The security maturity of Files.fm is moderate to good. The platform uses HTTPS exclusively and integrates Google reCAPTCHA v2 to protect forms from abuse. Two-factor authentication is supported, enhancing account security. Email validation includes MX record checks to reduce invalid registrations. However, the absence of explicit Content-Security-Policy and other security headers like X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options represents an area for improvement. No public vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file was found, which could limit transparency and incident response readiness. The temporary disabling of Facebook login due to external changes shows responsiveness to security and operational issues. Overall, Files.fm demonstrates a responsible security approach but could enhance its posture with additional headers and formal disclosure policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce Content-Security-Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS and data injection risks.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to provide clear vulnerability disclosure and incident response contact information.
  3. Add security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen browser security.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to avoid vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing explicit security policies and incident response procedures on the website.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Files.fm
Description
Files.fm provides secure and easy cloud storage for businesses and pro users to store, share, organize and publish content.
Key services
Cloud file storage, File sharing, File upload forms, Content publishing, Digital content sales, File sync and backup, e-signature support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Google Analytics, Matomo Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA v2, Uploadifive, Bootstrap CSS
Platforms
Web, Android, iOS, Windows, MacOS, Linux
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA v2 for forms
  • Two-factor authentication support
  • Email validation with MX record checks
  • Use of Matomo and Google Analytics for tracking

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ad Services, DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website provides comprehensive cloud storage and file sharing services with multiple subscription tiers.
  2. Strong European data privacy and GDPR compliance focus.
  3. Multiple apps and integrations available for various platforms.
  4. Use of modern analytics and marketing tools with user consent mechanisms.
  5. Security features include 2FA, captcha, and email validation.
  6. No signs of blocking or WAF interference; site fully accessible.
  7. Facebook login temporarily disabled due to external issues.
  8. No explicit security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page found.
Technical notes

Notes

Files.fm uses a custom-built web platform leveraging jQuery and Bootstrap for UI, with integration of Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Matomo for analytics and user tracking. The site supports multiple platforms including web, Android, iOS, Windows, MacOS, and Linux, indicating a mature and broad technical infrastructure. Hosting appears to be European-based with partnerships with known data center providers, supporting GDPR compliance. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and preconnect hints to Google domains. Mobile optimization is good, though accessibility features are basic. The site uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot protection and has implemented email validation with server-side MX checks. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modern frontend frameworks and enhanced accessibility compliance.
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. 73/100 +6Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 67/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with files.fm. 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 files.fm.

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.