Skip to main content

Security report for litmos.com

Litmos · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and GDPR outside view.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Litmos is a mature enterprise-focused learning management system (LMS) provider offering AI-powered corporate training solutions. The company targets large organizations seeking to empower employee, partner, and customer training with a SaaS platform that includes a robust content library and expert services. The website demonstrates a strong market position with over 4,000 customers and is branded consistently with professional design and clear navigation. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and analytics tools, showing good digital maturity and mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and consent management, though explicit security headers and incident response information are not publicly evident. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable anomaly that slightly reduces trust but does not outweigh the professional presentation and business credibility. Overall, Litmos presents as a credible and well-established LMS provider with a good balance of technical sophistication and business focus.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. 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

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

Keep watching litmos.com

This scan found 11 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
85
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
70

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 litmos.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
40,445
Employees
4
Customers
40,397
Third parties
44
Weak passwords
8%

Latest record dated 2026-01-13 · 2,627 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 litmos.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –litmos.com2026-01-13
  • –sjuedu.litmos.com2025-07-20
  • –sjuedu.litmos.com2025-05-31
  • –coupang.litmos.com2025-05-25

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Litmos operates in the technology sector, specifically in enterprise LMS and corporate training. Its business model is SaaS with revenue from platform subscriptions, training content, and professional services. The company leverages AI to differentiate its offerings and targets HR, L&D professionals, and enterprises across multiple industries. The presence of major customer logos and social media engagement indicates strong market penetration and brand recognition. Partnerships and support portals suggest a mature ecosystem. The company likely benefits from being part of SAP, enhancing its enterprise credibility. Growth indicators include AI innovation and extensive solution offerings by use case and industry. Strategic observations highlight the importance of compliance training and revenue enablement as key verticals.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and integrates consent management via TrustArc, indicating awareness of privacy and security compliance. Use of SAML SSO plugin suggests secure authentication practices. However, explicit security headers such as HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options are not clearly present, representing an area for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a public vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file and incident response contacts limits transparency. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by adopting additional best practices and public security policies to strengthen trust and compliance posture.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify HTTP security headers including HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and incident handling.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information on the website.
  4. Regularly audit and update all plugins and third-party libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher standards and improve user experience for all users.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Litmos
Description
Deliver training across your enterprise with our easy-to-use online learning management system and robust content libraries. Trusted by thousands of top-performing companies to empower employee, partner, and customer training.
Key services
Learning Management System (LMS), Training content libraries, AI-powered learning tools, Implementation and expert L&D services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, Gravity Forms plugin, Google Tag Manager, Font Awesome icons, jQuery, Vector analytics pixel, MiniOrange SAML Single Sign-On
Frameworks
WordPress, Visual Composer (WPBakery)
Platforms
Web (desktop and mobile responsive)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS
  • Use of SAML SSO plugin
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of consent management script (TrustArc)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Vector analytics, Bing Ads tracking
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Vector analytics, TrustArc consent
Marketing tools
Gravity Forms, TrustArc
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 rich content and multimedia
  2. Strong corporate branding and customer references
  3. Use of modern web technologies and analytics
  4. No visible security or privacy policy gaps
  5. WHOIS data missing which is unusual for enterprise domain
  6. No signs of adult or questionable content
  7. Good SEO and accessibility practices but could improve security headers
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using Visual Composer for layout and Gravity Forms for data collection. It integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools including Google Tag Manager, Bing Ads, Vector analytics, and TrustArc for consent management. The site is mobile responsive with good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD) for enhanced search engine understanding. Performance is moderate with some large images and video content. The technology stack is modern but relies on several third-party scripts which require ongoing maintenance. Hosting provider details are not explicit. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable web presence but could benefit from performance optimizations and enhanced security configurations.
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 litmos.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 litmos.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.