Skip to main content

Security report for globalsign.com

GlobalSign, GMO Internet Group, Inc. · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

GlobalSign, a subsidiary of GMO Internet Group, Inc., is a leading provider of digital certificate and identity management solutions globally. Their website showcases expertise in automated, scalable digital certificates including SSL/TLS, managed PKI, IoT security, authentication, and email security services. The company targets enterprise and business customers requiring robust digital identity and security solutions. The site is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and rich in relevant content, reflecting a mature digital presence. Technically, the website leverages Concrete CMS, jQuery, Bootstrap, and integrates advanced analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Piwik Pro, Microsoft Clarity, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site uses HTTPS with strong SSL configuration and implements cookie consent mechanisms compliant with GDPR. However, explicit security headers like X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options are not clearly visible in the HTML source and could be improved. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates good practices including encrypted connections, cookie consent, and ISO 27001 certification. The absence of a security.txt file and clear incident response contacts are gaps that could be addressed to enhance transparency and readiness. The WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, which is common for security companies but slightly reduces domain registration transparency. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and compliant with privacy regulations. It effectively communicates its business offerings and maintains a strong security posture with room for minor improvements. The risk level is low, and the site is suitable for enterprise clients seeking digital security solutions.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

2 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';…

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

Keep watching globalsign.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. 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
100
Security headers
30
Email security
82
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
80

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

GlobalSign holds a strong market position as a global certificate authority and digital identity provider, operating under GMO Internet Group. Their business model focuses on B2B services in digital security, offering SSL/TLS certificates, managed PKI, IoT security, and authentication solutions. Revenue streams likely include certificate sales, managed services, and enterprise security solutions. The company targets medium to large enterprises and government sectors requiring trusted digital identity management. Partnerships with analytics and marketing platforms indicate a mature digital marketing strategy. The presence of ISO 27001 certification and comprehensive privacy policies supports their credibility and compliance stance. Growth indicators include extensive global reach and integration of modern consent and analytics technologies.

Security posture

GlobalSign's website security posture is strong, with HTTPS enforced and excellent SSL configuration. The presence of ISO 27001 certification indicates adherence to recognized security standards. The site uses cookie consent management compliant with GDPR, and no exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options are not clearly present and should be implemented to mitigate clickjacking and MIME sniffing risks. The lack of a published security.txt file and incident response contact information is a minor compliance gap. Overall, the security maturity is high, suitable for a security-focused enterprise, with recommendations to enhance header policies and incident transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify security headers including X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen browser security.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to provide clear vulnerability disclosure and incident response contacts.
  3. Add explicit incident response and abuse contact information on the website for transparency and compliance.
  4. Maintain and regularly update privacy and cookie policies to reflect evolving regulations and practices.
  5. Enhance WHOIS transparency if possible, or provide clear justification for privacy protection to build trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GlobalSign, GMO Internet Group, Inc.
Description
Experts in automated, scalable, integrated digital certificate solutions including SSL/TLS, managed PKI, IoT, authentication, and email security.
Key services
SSL/TLS certificates, Managed PKI, IoT security, Authentication services, Email security
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap, Concrete CMS, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot CMP, Piwik Pro Analytics, Genesys Messenger
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies and session management

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Piwik Pro, Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick, Meta Platforms, Inc.
Tracking pixels
Cookiebot, Piwik Pro, Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Cookiebot CMP, Pardot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. Content is professional, detailed, and focused on digital certificate and identity management services.
  3. Strong privacy and cookie consent mechanisms are implemented.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected, limiting domain registration transparency.
  6. Multiple external analytics and marketing tools are used with user consent.
  7. No security.txt or explicit vulnerability disclosure page found.
  8. ISO 27001 certification is indicated, enhancing trust.
  9. Social media presence includes Facebook and LinkedIn.
  10. No adult or questionable content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Concrete CMS with frontend technologies including jQuery and Bootstrap, ensuring responsive and accessible design. Integration with Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot CMP, Piwik Pro, and Microsoft Clarity indicates a sophisticated analytics and consent management infrastructure. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. No critical technical debt or vulnerabilities were identified in the HTML source. Opportunities exist to improve security headers and incident response mechanisms. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found but the infrastructure appears robust and professionally managed.
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. 80/100 +4Low21 findingsView report
  2. 76/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with globalsign.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 globalsign.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.