Skip to main content

Security report for linnworks.com

Linnworks · Technology · United Kingdom

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

Linnworks is a technology company specializing in multichannel order and inventory management software for e-commerce retailers and brands. Their SaaS platform automates key operational processes, enabling businesses to efficiently manage sales across multiple channels. The company targets online sellers seeking to streamline inventory, order fulfillment, and shipping integrations. The website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design and comprehensive content, supporting their market position as an established player in e-commerce automation. Technically, the website is built on WordPress and leverages modern marketing and analytics tools such as Microsoft Clarity, Google Tag Manager, Demandbase, and Visual Website Optimizer. The site is mobile-optimized and implements good SEO and accessibility basics. Security is well addressed with HTTPS, strong security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities. However, the absence of a published security policy and incident response details suggests room for improvement in transparency and security communication. The WHOIS data is notably missing, which raises questions about domain registration transparency and legitimacy. Despite this, the website content and business information indicate a legitimate and professional operation. Overall, the site demonstrates a solid security posture and digital maturity but would benefit from enhanced security disclosures and WHOIS transparency. Strategically, Linnworks should focus on publishing explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms to strengthen trust and compliance. Regular audits of third-party scripts and enhanced accessibility features will further improve their security and user experience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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. 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

  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 linnworks.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. 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
52
Security headers
80
Email security
80
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
81

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention linnworks.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
380
Employees
0
Customers
380
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
15%

17 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for linnworks.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Linnworks operates in the technology and e-commerce sectors, providing SaaS solutions for order and inventory management. Their business model centers on subscription-based software services targeting medium-sized e-commerce retailers and brands. The company leverages partnerships and integrations with shipping and marketplace platforms to enhance its value proposition. The website content and structure indicate a focus on professional B2B customers seeking operational efficiency. The presence of multiple marketing and analytics tools suggests active customer acquisition and retention strategies. The lack of WHOIS transparency is a minor concern but does not detract from the company's established market presence. Linnworks appears well-positioned with a clear value proposition and a consistent brand identity.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no detected exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. The use of modern tracking and marketing scripts is balanced with privacy compliance measures including cookie consent and privacy policies aligned with GDPR. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy page and incident response contact information limits transparency and may impact customer trust. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file was found, which is a best practice for mature security programs. Overall, the security maturity is solid but could be enhanced by formalizing security governance disclosures and improving incident response readiness communication.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page detailing security practices and commitments.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information, including security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance website accessibility features to meet higher compliance standards.
  5. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to mitigate supply chain risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Linnworks Ltd
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Linnworks
Description
Linnworks provides multichannel order and inventory management software designed to automate and streamline e-commerce operations for retailers and brands.
Key services
Order management, Inventory management, Multichannel selling automation, Shipping and fulfillment integration
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Demandbase, Cookie Script, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO), Bing UET
Frameworks
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of modern security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Google Tag Manager, Demandbase, Visual Website Optimizer
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Demandbase, Visual Website Optimizer
Marketing tools
Cookie Script, Visual Website Optimizer, Demandbase
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which is unusual and reduces trust.
  3. Website uses multiple third-party tracking and marketing tools.
  4. Privacy and cookie policies are present and appear comprehensive.
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  6. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
  7. Contact information is available via contact page and footer.
  8. Website is built on WordPress with modern front-end technologies.
  9. SSL and security headers are properly configured.
  10. No suspicious or malicious domains detected in external links.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern front-end leveraging JavaScript and multiple third-party marketing and analytics services. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security headers and HTTPS configuration are well implemented. The site uses Visual Website Optimizer for A/B testing and Demandbase for B2B marketing intelligence. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. The technical stack is current but could benefit from enhanced accessibility and performance optimizations. No critical technical debt or vulnerabilities were detected in the analyzed content.
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 linnworks.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 linnworks.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.