Skip to main content

Security report for indiegogo.com

Indiegogo · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Indiegogo is a prominent global crowdfunding platform that enables entrepreneurs and innovators to raise funds for their projects in technology and design sectors. The platform supports a wide range of campaigns, helping creators bring their ideas to life while engaging a community of backers. Indiegogo's market position is strong, with a large user base and a well-established brand in the crowdfunding industry. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including Vue.js, Typekit fonts, Google reCAPTCHA, and Facebook Pixel for marketing and analytics. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility, providing a seamless user experience. Security-wise, the platform enforces HTTPS, uses security headers, and implements CSRF tokens and bot prevention mechanisms, reflecting a mature security posture. However, explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly available, which could be improved. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with privacy regulations, though the absence of WHOIS data slightly impacts domain trustworthiness. Strategic recommendations include enhancing transparency on security policies, publishing vulnerability disclosure information, and providing clear incident response contacts to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

3 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

  2. 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

  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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching indiegogo.com

This scan found 19 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
77
Security headers
45
Email security
82
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
76

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

Indiegogo operates in the technology and e-commerce sectors as an essential entity facilitating crowdfunding campaigns globally. Its business model revolves around connecting project creators with backers, generating revenue through campaign fees and value-added services. The platform targets entrepreneurs, innovators, and early adopters interested in funding new products and ideas. Indiegogo's competitive advantage lies in its broad campaign categories, global reach, and robust platform features. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem, including integrations with payment processors and marketing tools. Growth indicators include continuous platform enhancements and active community engagement. While the parent company and founding year are not explicitly stated, the brand's market presence and size indicate a large, established organization.

Security posture

The security posture of Indiegogo is solid, with HTTPS enforced site-wide and multiple security headers implemented to protect against common web vulnerabilities. The use of CSRF tokens and Google reCAPTCHA indicates proactive measures against automated attacks and cross-site request forgery. Facebook Pixel integration is handled with external ID tracking, suggesting attention to user privacy and data security. However, the absence of a publicly available security policy, incident response contact, or vulnerability disclosure program represents a compliance gap and potential risk in transparency. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The platform would benefit from publishing detailed security documentation and establishing clear channels for security incident reporting to enhance its security culture and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response information on the website.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  3. Provide clear contact information for the Data Protection Officer or security team.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and tracking pixels to mitigate risks.
  5. Enhance user security features such as multi-factor authentication to protect accounts.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Indiegogo
Description
Crowdfund innovations in tech and design before they go mainstream and support entrepreneurs that are working to bring their dreams to life.
Key services
Crowdfunding campaigns, Fundraising for tech and design projects, Support for entrepreneurs
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Vue.js, Typekit Fonts, Google reCAPTCHA, Facebook Pixel
Frameworks
Vue.js
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • CSRF tokens present
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for bot prevention
  • Facebook Pixel with external ID tracking

Analytics and tracking

Services
Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel, Google reCAPTCHA
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 rich content and professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available, possibly due to privacy protection or registry restrictions.
  3. Strong use of modern web technologies and security best practices.
  4. Clear presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  5. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML snippet.
  6. Social media presence confirmed via Twitter and Facebook links.
  7. No signs of adult or NSFW content.
  8. No visible security policy or incident response contact information.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
Technical notes

Notes

Indiegogo's technical infrastructure is modern and robust, leveraging Vue.js for frontend framework and Typekit for typography. The site uses Google reCAPTCHA to prevent bot abuse and Facebook Pixel for marketing analytics. The presence of CSRF tokens indicates secure form handling. Performance is optimized with asynchronous script loading and responsive design for mobile devices. Accessibility features are implemented to a good standard, and SEO meta tags are comprehensive, including Open Graph and Twitter Card metadata. No CMS or hosting provider details were explicitly detected. The technical stack supports a fast, secure, and user-friendly platform, though continuous monitoring and updates are recommended to maintain security and performance.
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. 78/100Low24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with indiegogo.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 indiegogo.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.