Security report for hackerone.com
HackerOne · Technology · N/a
Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in GDPR outside view.
HackerOne is a leading global platform specializing in offensive security, combining AI capabilities with a vast community of security researchers to identify and remediate vulnerabilities across the software development lifecycle. The company offers a comprehensive suite of services including AI Red Teaming, Bug Bounty programs, Pentest as a Service, and Vulnerability Disclosure Programs, positioning itself as a trusted partner for enterprises seeking continuous security coverage. The website demonstrates a mature digital presence with professional design, responsive layout, and extensive content tailored to security professionals and enterprise clients. Technically, the site leverages Drupal CMS, integrates modern analytics and marketing tools, and employs HTTPS with good security practices, although some security headers could be improved. The security posture is strong with dedicated incident response contact points and privacy compliance mechanisms in place. However, the absence of WHOIS data for the domain is unusual and warrants further investigation to confirm domain registration legitimacy. Overall, HackerOne presents a credible, professional, and secure online presence aligned with its market leadership in cybersecurity services.
Scanned
NIS2 and GDPR posture
- GDPR outside view
- 80/ 100 · Low
- Checks completed
- 7of 7
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
- (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
- (b) Incident handling: One indicator
- (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
- (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
- (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
- (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
- (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
- (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
- (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
- (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
1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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
- GDPR Art. 7
- ePrivacy Art. 5(3)
- NIST PT-4: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 PT-4: Consent
- High
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
Keep watching hackerone.com
This scan found 10 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
- 100
- Security headers
- 70
- Email security
- 95
- DNS health
- 90
- Network security
- 100
- GDPR outside view
- 80
- Average
- 89
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
Security posture
Recommendations
- Implement and publish comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance browser security.
- Publish a security.txt file at the root domain to facilitate vulnerability reporting and improve transparency.
- Disclose relevant security certifications and compliance frameworks (e.g., ISO 27001, SOC 2) prominently on the website to reinforce trust.
- Enhance incident response transparency by providing more detailed public documentation on procedures and timelines.
- Regularly audit and minimize third-party scripts and tracking tools to reduce potential attack surface and improve privacy compliance.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
- Company
- HackerOne
- Description
- HackerOne combines AI with the ingenuity of the largest community of security researchers to find and fix security, privacy, and AI vulnerabilities across the SDLC. HackerOne offers AI red teaming, crowdsourced security, bug bounty, vulnerability disclosure and pentesting.
- Key services
- AI Red Teaming, Bug Bounty Platform, Pentest as a Service, Vulnerability Disclosure Program, Code Review
- Content quality
- excellent
- Branding
- consistent
Technology
- Stack
- Drupal CMS, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Marketo Forms, PathFactory, SVG icons, Responsive design
- Frameworks
- Drupal
- Performance
- fast
- Mobile
- excellent
- Accessibility
- good
- SEO
- good
Security
- Observed score
- 85/100
- Good practices seen
- HTTPS enforced
- Security & Trust page detailing policies
- Dedicated security incident contact page
- Use of consent management platform (TrustArc)
Analytics and tracking
- Services
- Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
- Tracking level
- moderate
- Privacy practices
- good
Advertising
- Tracking pixels
- TrustArc Consent
- Marketing tools
- Marketo, PathFactory
- Transparency
- good
Site quality
- Design
- excellent
- User experience
- excellent
- Content relevance
- excellent
- Navigation
- excellent
- Professionalism
- excellent
- Trustworthiness
- high
Key observations
- Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
- Strong branding and professional design
- Comprehensive product and solution offerings in offensive security
- Multiple customer logos and case studies enhance trust
- Use of modern web technologies and analytics
- Privacy and cookie policies present with consent mechanisms
- No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found publicly
- Security incident contact available via form
- No WHOIS data available, which is unusual for a .com domain
Technical notes
Notes
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.
- MITRE CWE (opens in a new tab)4.20 (2026-04-30) · CWE Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP Top 10:2025 (opens in a new tab)2025 (membership per CWE 4.20) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- MITRE CAPEC (opens in a new tab)3.9 (2023-01-24) · CAPEC Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP ASVS (opens in a new tab)5.0.0 · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (opens in a new tab)latest (checklist.json, master) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Secure Headers Project (opens in a new tab)2026-10-18 · Apache-2.0
- Mozilla Server Side TLS (intermediate) (opens in a new tab)6.0 · MPL-2.0
- NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 (OSCAL catalog) (opens in a new tab)5.2.0 · Public domain (US Government work)
- Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 333, 27.12.2022 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 (opens in a new tab)OJ L, 18.10.2024 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy), consolidated (opens in a new tab)19.12.2009 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- RFC Editor metadata (opens in a new tab)per-RFC (obsolete RFCs rejected) · IETF Trust Legal Provisions (metadata only)
- NIST CSRC, W3C TR, IETF Datatracker, EDPB, EUR-Lex CELLAR and gesetze-bayern.de (opens in a new tab)per document · Titles and links only
- NIST NVD CVE API 2.0 (opens in a new tab)live records · Public domain (NVD); CVE® records © MITRE, free use
- W3C WCAG 2.2 (opens in a new tab)W3C Recommendation (wcag.json) · W3C Software and Document License
- ETSI EN 301 549 (opens in a new tab)V3.2.1 (2021-03), clause headings · Clause numbers and titles only (© ETSI)
- Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 151, 7.6.2019 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive (EU) 2016/2102 (Web Accessibility Directive) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 327, 2.12.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Retrieved 2026-10-25
Earlier scans of this domain
- 89/100Low12 findingsView report
- 89/100 +9Low12 findingsView report
- 80/100Low16 findingsView report
Feedback on this report
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with hackerone.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review hackerone.com.