Skip to main content

Security report for helpspot.com

UserScape, Inc. · Technology · United States

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

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

HelpSpot, operated by UserScape, Inc., is a specialized help desk software provider focused on transforming chaotic email support into an efficient, unified system. Established in 2005, the company targets businesses and organizations that require streamlined customer support solutions. Their offerings include email ticketing, automation, reporting, and self-service portals, available as both cloud-hosted and on-premise deployments. The website demonstrates strong branding, comprehensive content, and a professional user experience, positioning HelpSpot as an affordable and customizable alternative in the help desk software market. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies such as Alpine.js, Livewire, and Cloudflare CDN, hosted on AWS infrastructure. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS implementation significantly impacts the security posture. Security headers are present, but critical TLS protocols and encryption are missing, exposing the site to potential risks. Privacy compliance is supported by a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service, though cookie consent mechanisms are not evident. Overall, while the business and technical maturity are solid, the lack of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability that must be addressed to ensure trust and security.

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 helpspot.com

This scan found 15 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
50
Security headers
50
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
43
Average
53

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

HelpSpot operates in the technology sector, serving a diverse range of industries including government and non-profits. Their business model is subscription-based SaaS with options for self-hosting, appealing to small to medium-sized organizations. Competitive advantages include no per-ticket fees, professional onboarding, and a focus on essential help desk features without unnecessary complexity. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem with dedicated domains for store and support services. Customer testimonials and case studies highlight significant time savings and improved support efficiency, indicating positive market reception and growth potential. Marketing efforts leverage LinkedIn and Google Analytics for targeted outreach and user behavior analysis. The company emphasizes human-centric support augmented by AI features, aligning with current industry trends.

Security posture

The website exhibits a basic security posture with standard security headers such as X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and X-Content-Type-Options. However, the SSL certificate is invalid or missing, and no TLS protocols are enabled, resulting in unencrypted HTTP traffic. This is a critical security gap that undermines data confidentiality and integrity. The site lacks HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption, which are best practices for modern secure web applications. No explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found, though a security overview page exists. Data backup and hosting are managed via AWS with region-restricted backups for data sovereignty. Overall, the security maturity is low due to missing HTTPS, posing significant risk to users and business operations.

Recommendations

  1. Immediately obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and disable insecure legacy protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  5. Publish a formal vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and trust.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including Alpine.js for reactive UI, Livewire for server-driven components, and Swiper.js for interactive carousels. It uses Google Fonts and is served via Cloudflare CDN, hosted on AWS infrastructure in US-East and Frankfurt regions. The site is mobile responsive with good accessibility and SEO optimization. Performance metrics are moderate, with no explicit load time data available. The site uses cookies for session management and CSRF protection. Marketing and analytics integrations include Google Analytics and LinkedIn Insight Tag. The absence of a valid SSL certificate is the primary technical risk, affecting security and user trust. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but requires urgent security upgrades.
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 helpspot.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 helpspot.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.