Skip to main content

Security report for jotfor.ms

Jotform Inc. · Technology · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Jotform Inc. is a well-established technology company specializing in online form building and workflow automation solutions. Founded in 2006 and headquartered in San Francisco, it serves a global audience with a suite of SaaS products including form builders, PDF editors, e-signature software, and AI-powered tools. The company has a strong market presence with over 30 million users worldwide and offers a freemium business model supported by subscription services. Technically, the website demonstrates a mature digital infrastructure utilizing modern JavaScript libraries, Google Tag Manager, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and SEO, reflecting a high level of digital maturity. Structured data and comprehensive metadata enhance search visibility and user experience. From a security perspective, Jotform employs HTTPS with strong SSL configurations and security headers, indicating good security hygiene. However, explicit security policies and incident response information are not prominently published, representing an area for improvement. The absence of WHOIS data limits transparency but does not detract significantly from the overall trustworthiness given the company's strong brand and operational history. Overall, Jotform presents a low-risk profile with robust business credibility and technical implementation. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security transparency, publishing vulnerability disclosure policies, and maintaining up-to-date domain registration information to further strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 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

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 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. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching jotfor.ms

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
75
Security headers
30
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
78

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

Jotform holds a leading position in the online form builder market, leveraging a SaaS subscription and freemium model to attract a diverse customer base ranging from individuals to enterprises. Its competitive advantages include a comprehensive product suite that extends beyond forms to include AI agents, PDF editing, and workflow approvals. The company benefits from a strong brand, extensive social media presence, and a global user base. Revenue streams are primarily subscription-based, supplemented by value-added services. Partnerships and integrations with major platforms enhance its ecosystem. Growth indicators include continuous product innovation and a large active user community. Operationally, Jotform maintains a professional web presence with clear business information and customer support channels.

Security posture

Jotform demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, robust SSL configurations, and implementation of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options. The website avoids exposing sensitive data and employs secure form handling practices. However, the lack of publicly available detailed security policies, incident response plans, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests room for improvement in transparency and readiness. Compliance with GDPR is indicated through privacy and cookie policies with consent management. No critical vulnerabilities or security issues were detected in the website content. Enhancing published security documentation and establishing formal incident response contacts would elevate the security maturity further.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and user trust.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  3. Enhance visibility and contact information for the Data Protection Officer or privacy compliance officer to support GDPR and related regulations.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Maintain accurate and publicly accessible WHOIS domain registration information to improve domain trustworthiness and reduce suspicion.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Jotform Inc.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Jotform Inc.
Description
Jotform is an online form builder with drag-and-drop no-code functionality that lets you create powerful, beautiful, customized online forms in minutes. Jotform has also developed other powerful products, such as Jotform Apps, Jotform Store Builder, Jotform Tables, and Jotform Approvals.
Key services
Online form builder, Form creator, Survey maker, PDF editor, Electronic signature software, AI agent software, App builder, Store builder, Workflow approvals
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, LazySizes (lazy loading), SVG graphics, HTML5, CSS3
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with CSRF protections implied

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
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 presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  3. Multiple social media and trust signals present
  4. No security or WAF blocking detected
  5. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain registration transparency
  6. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  7. No adult or questionable content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with modern web technologies including JavaScript, SVG graphics, and asynchronous script loading for performance optimization. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot for analytics and consent management, reflecting a mature approach to data privacy and user tracking. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility considerations. Performance is fast with lazy loading of images and scripts. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting details are not disclosed but the use of CDN domains indicates a distributed content delivery approach. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a high-quality user experience with scalability and security in mind.
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 jotfor.ms. 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 jotfor.ms.

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.