Skip to main content

Security report for jwplayer.com

JW Player · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

JW Player is a well-established technology company founded in 2007, specializing in video player technology and video platform services targeted primarily at developers and enterprises requiring video streaming and management solutions. The company holds a strong market position as a provider of video technology with a focus on developer-friendly tools and video analytics. The website reflects a professional digital presence with consistent branding and good content quality, although explicit privacy and terms of service documents were not detected in the provided HTML content. Technically, the website leverages modern JavaScript libraries, marketing and analytics tools such as HubSpot, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and is hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure, indicating a mature technical infrastructure. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied and cookie consent implemented, but lacks visible security headers and explicit security policies or incident response information. Overall, the domain registration is consistent and trustworthy, supporting the legitimacy of the business. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing comprehensive privacy and terms policies, and providing clear contact information for security incidents to improve compliance and trust.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

5 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 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 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
    • 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 jwplayer.com

This scan found 20 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
57
Security headers
25
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
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

JW Player operates in the technology sector providing video streaming and player solutions as a B2B SaaS model. Their competitive advantage lies in their developer-centric approach and comprehensive video platform capabilities including analytics and monetization. The company targets media companies, enterprises, and developers, leveraging partnerships with marketing and analytics platforms to enhance customer engagement. The domain age and registration details align with the company's founding date, indicating a stable market presence. The website's use of advanced marketing tools and tracking pixels suggests a focus on growth and customer acquisition. No parent or subsidiary companies were identified from the data. The business model is subscription and service-based, focusing on video technology solutions.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS usage and cookie consent mechanisms in place. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the overall security posture. No explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms were found, indicating potential gaps in security governance and transparency. The use of multiple third-party tracking and marketing scripts increases the attack surface and privacy risks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. Compliance with GDPR is partially indicated by the cookie consent but lacks a detailed privacy policy. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not evident from the data.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service on the website.
  2. Add and enforce security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents, including security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to enhance DNS security.
  5. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
JW Player
Description
JW Player provides a video player and video platform solutions for developers and businesses to deliver video content online.
Key services
Video player technology, Video hosting and streaming, Video analytics, Video monetization
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot, Facebook Pixel, OneTrust Cookie Consent, FontAwesome
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by URL)
  • Cookie consent implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
AdRoll
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, HubSpot Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Pardot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website uses multiple marketing and analytics tools indicating active digital marketing
  2. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via OneTrust
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found in the provided HTML snippet
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML snippet
  5. Domain is well-established and not privacy protected
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page detected
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern JavaScript technologies and integrates multiple marketing and analytics platforms including HubSpot, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. Hosting is provided by Amazon AWS, as indicated by the DNS nameservers. The site uses FontAwesome for icons and Google Tag Manager for tag management. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is good with proper meta tags and viewport settings. However, no CMS or specific web frameworks were identified from the provided HTML snippet. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and accessibility improvements.
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. 73/100 −1Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 74/100Medium27 findingsView report
  3. 74/100Medium27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with jwplayer.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 jwplayer.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.