Skip to main content

Security report for freewheel.com

FreeWheel · Media · N/A

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

FreeWheel operates as a leading platform connecting advertisers directly to streaming video inventory from top publishers, eliminating intermediaries to maximize media spend efficiency. The company targets media buyers and sellers with specialized suites and advisory services, positioning itself strongly in the media technology sector. Technically, the website is built on WordPress hosted on WP Engine with Cloudflare CDN, leveraging modern marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and HubSpot. The site demonstrates good SEO and mobile optimization with excellent content quality and user experience. Security posture is solid with valid SSL certificates and basic security headers; however, it lacks modern TLS protocol support and advanced DNS security features. Cookie consent is managed via OneTrust, indicating GDPR compliance. Overall, FreeWheel presents a professional and trustworthy digital presence with room for security enhancements.

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 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';…
  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

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

Keep watching freewheel.com

This scan found 15 issues across 5 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. 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
85
Security headers
40
Email security
100
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
76

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 freewheel.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
42
Employees
0
Customers
26
Third parties
16
Weak passwords
14%

2 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 freewheel.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

FreeWheel's market positioning as a direct streaming video inventory provider offers competitive advantages by reducing middlemen and increasing working media dollars for advertisers. Its business model revolves around SaaS platforms for both media buyers and sellers, supplemented by advisory services. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem evident from its external login portals and social media presence. Growth indicators include active content publishing and market insights. The company targets large enterprises in the media sector, focusing on programmatic and addressable TV advertising. Strategic observations suggest opportunities to enhance security transparency and incident response readiness to further strengthen market trust.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate with foundational protections such as valid SSL certificates, HttpOnly and Secure cookie flags, and Cloudflare CDN usage. However, the absence of modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2/1.3), HSTS, DNSSEC, and CAA records indicates gaps that could expose the site to certain risks. No explicit security policy or incident response information is published, limiting transparency. GDPR compliance is supported through OneTrust cookie consent. The lack of a security.txt file and dedicated vulnerability disclosure channels suggests limited readiness for coordinated vulnerability management. Overall, the security posture is adequate but would benefit from enhancements in protocol support, DNS security, and published security governance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols to improve encryption standards.
  2. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Deploy DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance domain name system security.
  4. Publish a security.txt file and establish a clear vulnerability disclosure policy.
  5. Develop and publicly share incident response and security policies to improve transparency and readiness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is modern and robust, utilizing WordPress CMS with WP Engine hosting and Cloudflare CDN for performance and security. The technology stack includes popular JavaScript libraries and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, HubSpot, and OneTrust for cookie management. Performance is fast with good mobile optimization and SEO practices via Yoast SEO plugin. Technical debt appears low, but the lack of modern TLS protocols and DNS security features presents risks. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations and improve accessibility standards to further enhance operational resilience and user trust.
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 freewheel.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 freewheel.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.