Skip to main content

Security report for kofax.com

Tungsten Automation Corporation · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

52/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Tungsten Automation Corporation, formerly known as Kofax, is a leading enterprise technology provider specializing in AI-powered workflow automation solutions. The company offers a broad portfolio of products including document and workflow automation, accounts payable and receivable automation, print and workplace automation, and PDF and eSignature solutions. Positioned as a market leader, Tungsten Automation is recognized by industry analysts such as Everest Group and IDC for its intelligent document processing capabilities. The company targets global enterprises seeking to streamline complex, data-intensive business processes and improve operational efficiency through AI and automation technologies. Technically, the website is built on a modern stack including Sitecore CMS, jQuery, and integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics, Visual Website Optimizer, and Eloqua. Hosting appears to be on Microsoft Azure. While the site demonstrates excellent content quality, branding consistency, and user experience, it suffers from critical security shortcomings, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS support, which severely impacts its security posture. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms are present and GDPR compliant, supporting good privacy compliance. Overall, the site reflects a mature enterprise digital presence but urgently requires remediation of its SSL/TLS configuration to meet basic security standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching kofax.com

This scan found 16 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
0
Security headers
60
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
52

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

Tungsten Automation operates in the technology sector with a focus on workflow automation and AI-driven process orchestration. The company serves large enterprises across multiple industries including banking, healthcare, public sector, supply chain, and insurance. Its business model is B2B SaaS and software licensing, with a strong emphasis on AI-enhanced automation solutions. The company maintains a robust partner ecosystem and showcases high-profile customers and case studies, reinforcing its market leadership. The recent rebranding from Kofax to Tungsten Automation signals strategic growth and repositioning. The website content and external integrations indicate a sophisticated marketing and customer engagement strategy. However, the lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers suggests a controlled lead generation approach primarily via web forms.

Security posture

The website implements several security best practices including Content Security Policy, Strict Transport Security, and secure cookie flags. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of any TLS protocol support represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to potential data interception and undermine trust. No known vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, but the lack of HTTPS is a fundamental security failure. There is no public incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which may indicate limited transparency in security operations. Privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned policies and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is weak due to critical SSL/TLS issues, despite good policy and header implementations.

Recommendations

  1. Immediately obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) to secure communications.
  3. Enhance HSTS policy to include subdomains and preload to prevent downgrade attacks.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation checking performance and security.
  5. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack with Sitecore CMS, jQuery, and integrates multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools. Hosting is likely on Microsoft Azure, providing scalable infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized and accessible with good SEO practices including meta tags and Open Graph data. However, performance metrics are missing or zero, indicating potential issues with load time measurement or optimization. The absence of HTTPS and TLS protocols is a critical technical flaw. The site uses advanced content delivery and marketing technologies but must address fundamental security infrastructure gaps to ensure reliable and secure user experience.
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 kofax.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 kofax.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.