Skip to main content

Security report for inpay.com

Inpay - the global payments network · Financial services · Denmark

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

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

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 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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      SPF DNS Lookup Limit Exceeded

      SPF record requires 12 DNS lookups (max 10)

      What to do: Reduce includes and mechanisms to stay under limit

  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 inpay.com

This scan found 21 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
72
Security headers
35
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
73

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

Inpay operates in the competitive cross-border payments market with a focus on sectors requiring complex payment solutions such as financial services, iGaming, NGOs, and corporate clients. Their business model centers on providing a unified payment network that simplifies multi-supplier management challenges. The company leverages a global banking network covering 90+ countries and processes over 1 million transactions monthly. Their regulatory compliance with the Danish FSA and emphasis on customer service through a dedicated portal are competitive advantages. The presence of partnerships and fintech collaborations suggests a strategic ecosystem approach. The website content and structure reflect a mature marketing strategy targeting professional clients and partners, supported by active social media engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS enforced and the use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms from abuse. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the lack of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency and readiness perception. The WHOIS data absence raises questions about domain registration legitimacy, which should be addressed to enhance trust. Overall, the security posture is good but can be improved by adding security headers and publishing formal security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Add standard security HTTP headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide clear contact details for a Data Protection Officer or privacy contact to improve GDPR transparency.
  5. Investigate and resolve the lack of WHOIS domain registration data to improve domain legitimacy and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Inpay
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Inpay
Description
Inpay provides international cross-border payments services, enabling smarter, faster payments for financial services, iGaming, NGOs, corporates and more.
Key services
Money Out - instant, 24/7 global payouts, Money In - Open Banking enabled cardless pay-ins, Customer portal for transaction monitoring
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, Gravity Forms, Swiper.js, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, reCAPTCHA v3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA v3 on forms
  • Cookie consent mechanism via Cookiebot
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Cloudflare Insights, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cloudflare Insights, HubSpot
Marketing tools
HubSpot
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. Strong focus on cross-border payment solutions with clear sector targeting
  3. Multiple contact methods including forms, email, phone, and physical addresses
  4. Use of modern web technologies and compliance tools like Cookiebot and reCAPTCHA
  5. No visible security headers detected in HTML source
  6. No explicit terms of service page found
  7. WHOIS data unavailable, which is unusual for a .com domain and may indicate privacy protection or registration issues
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 inpay.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 inpay.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.

inpay.com security report: 73/100, medium risk | Guard