Skip to main content

Security report for gtranslate.net

GTranslate Inc · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

GTranslate Inc operates a mature and established website translation service platform that enables website owners to automatically translate their sites into multiple languages. The company offers a SaaS business model with free and tiered paid subscription plans, leveraging machine and neural translation technologies. The website is well designed with clear navigation, detailed FAQs, and multiple customer trust signals, targeting businesses seeking to expand their global reach through multilingual content. Technically, the site uses JavaScript, jQuery, and Cloudflare infrastructure, with Intercom integrated for live chat support. However, the website suffers from critical security shortcomings, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which severely impacts its security posture. Privacy compliance is basic, with no cookie consent mechanism detected, and no explicit security or incident response policies are published. Overall, while the business and content quality are good, the lack of HTTPS and related security best practices present significant risks that should be addressed promptly.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of gtranslate.net. View the latest report

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

5 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 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

    • 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 gtranslate.net

This scan found 23 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. 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
100
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
66

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

GTranslate holds a strong market position as a technology provider in the website translation space, offering a cloud-based Translation Delivery Network that simplifies multilingual website deployment. Its competitive advantage lies in its mature domain, comprehensive language support, and flexible pricing plans catering to various business sizes. The company targets website owners and businesses aiming to increase international traffic and sales. Revenue streams are primarily subscription-based, with additional professional translation services offered. The partnership with TranslateX for API services indicates a broader ecosystem integration. Growth indicators include a 15-day free trial and active customer base claims. Strategic observations suggest focusing on improving security and privacy compliance to enhance customer trust and regulatory adherence.

Security posture

The current security maturity level of the website is low due to the absence of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical vulnerability exposing users to potential data interception and undermining trust. While SPF and DMARC records are configured, indicating some email security hygiene, the lack of TLS protocols, HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption further weaken the security posture. No security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are publicly available, indicating gaps in compliance and readiness. The use of Intercom for live chat introduces third-party tracking but is common in SaaS platforms. Overall, the security culture appears underdeveloped, and immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues is essential to mitigate business impact and regulatory risks.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable insecure protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation checking performance and security.
  5. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible from the website.
  6. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  7. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  8. Enhance privacy compliance by clearly stating data retention policies and user data handling practices.
  9. Improve website performance to reduce page load times below 3 seconds for better user experience.
  10. Consider adding verified company phone contact information to improve trust and accessibility.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted and registered via Cloudflare, leveraging their DNS and registrar services. The tech stack includes JavaScript and jQuery, with Intercom integrated for live chat support. The site lacks a CMS and appears custom-built or static. Performance is slow with a page load time exceeding 6 seconds and a large page size (~400 KB). Mobile optimization is good, and SEO practices are evident with meta tags and structured navigation. However, the absence of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols is a significant technical debt. The site uses a translation delivery network model, hosting translated content on language-specific domains. Technical risks include potential user trust loss due to insecure connections and possible SEO penalties. Modernizing the SSL/TLS configuration and optimizing performance would enhance operational stability and user experience.
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. 66/100Medium32 findingsView report
  2. 66/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with gtranslate.net. 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 gtranslate.net.

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.