Skip to main content

Security report for gitbook.com

GitBook · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

GitBook is a technology-focused SaaS platform that provides product documentation solutions with a branch-based Git workflow favored by software and product teams. The website demonstrates a professional design and integrates modern analytics and marketing tools such as Amplitude, HubSpot, and Google Analytics, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced, though explicit security headers and public security policies are not evident in the provided content. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable anomaly that slightly reduces trust but does not detract from the overall legitimacy of the business as indicated by the website content. Strategic recommendations include enhancing transparency around privacy and security policies and publishing vulnerability disclosure information.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of gitbook.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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

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 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 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 gitbook.com

This scan found 16 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
75
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
77

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 gitbook.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
11,898
Employees
0
Customers
11,833
Third parties
65
Weak passwords
0%

16 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 gitbook.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Brand lookalikes

Add-on

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

Tracked
35
Registered
35
Resolving
35
High or critical
0

Last checked 2026-06-19

Masked preview

  • ga•••••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • gi•••••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • it••••.comMediumomission

See the full lookalike list

A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of gitbook.com 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.

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

GitBook operates in the technology sector, targeting software development and product teams needing collaborative documentation tools. Its SaaS business model leverages integrations with Git workflows to differentiate itself in a competitive market. The company appears to maintain a medium-sized operation with consistent branding and a clear value proposition. The use of advanced analytics and marketing platforms suggests a focus on growth and customer engagement. However, the lack of publicly accessible contact information and privacy policies in the analyzed content may impact user trust and compliance perception.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses reputable analytics and marketing services, which is positive for security and data handling. However, the lack of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options in the HTML content is a gap that should be addressed. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is publicly available, which limits transparency and readiness perception. The missing WHOIS data raises questions about domain registration transparency but may be due to privacy protection services. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in policy transparency and technical security controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publicly disclose comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add and enforce security headers like CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security and incident response contacts to improve transparency and responsiveness.
  5. Investigate and clarify domain WHOIS information to ensure registration transparency and reduce suspicion.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GitBook
Description
Forget building and maintaining your own custom docs platform. With GitBook you get beautiful documentation for your users, and a branch-based Git workflow your team will love.
Key services
product documentation platform, branch-based Git workflow integration, collaborative docs
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Framer (generator), Amplitude Analytics, HubSpot, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Tracking pixels
HubSpot, Amplitude
Marketing tools
HubSpot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages explicitly detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  4. Strong use of analytics and marketing tools (Amplitude, HubSpot, Google Analytics).
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  6. No explicit security headers detected in HTML content; likely handled at server level but not visible here.
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  8. WHOIS data missing, which is unusual and warrants further investigation.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Framer for design and layout, integrating analytics and marketing tools such as Amplitude, HubSpot, and Google Analytics. The site uses modern web fonts and is optimized for mobile devices with responsive design. Performance is moderate, with no obvious broken elements or errors in the provided content. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. However, accessibility features are basic and could be enhanced. Hosting provider and CMS are not explicitly identified. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from additional security hardening and transparency measures.
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 −3Medium27 findingsView report
  2. 76/100 +2Low25 findingsView report
  3. 74/100Medium23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with gitbook.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 gitbook.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.