Skip to main content

Security report for mailerlite.com

MailerLite · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

83/100

Risk levelLow

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

MailerLite is a well-established SaaS company specializing in digital marketing tools, primarily focusing on email marketing, automation, and website building. The company targets businesses and creators seeking to grow their audience and revenue through user-friendly marketing solutions. Their market position is strong, emphasizing simplicity and comprehensive support, backed by 24/7 award-winning customer service. The website reflects a professional and modern digital presence with extensive features and integrations supporting e-commerce and content marketing. Technically, MailerLite employs a modern tech stack including JavaScript frameworks like Alpine.js, jQuery, and integrates with major analytics and consent management tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Cookiebot. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, accessibility, and SEO, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. From a security perspective, the website enforces HTTPS, uses security headers, and implements reCAPTCHA for form protection. Privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with active consent mechanisms. However, explicit security policies, incident response details, and vulnerability disclosure information are not publicly available, representing an area for improvement. Overall, the risk profile is low with strong business credibility and technical maturity. The absence of WHOIS data slightly reduces trust but is mitigated by the professional web presence and verified social media channels. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security policies, incident response plans, and vulnerability disclosure channels to enhance transparency and trust.

Scanned

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

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

2 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 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 mailerlite.com

This scan found 15 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
65
Email security
82
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
83

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

MailerLite operates in the competitive email marketing and digital marketing SaaS sector, offering a broad suite of tools including email campaigns, automation workflows, website and landing page builders, and e-commerce integrations. Their business model is subscription-based SaaS targeting SMBs, creators, agencies, and enterprises. The company leverages partnerships with major payment processors and integration platforms such as Stripe, Shopify, Zapier, and WordPress, enhancing its ecosystem and customer reach. Growth indicators include a strong online presence, comprehensive resource offerings like an academy, and extensive template libraries. The company’s strategic focus on simplicity and user experience differentiates it in a crowded market, appealing to users seeking effective yet easy-to-use marketing solutions.

Security posture

MailerLite demonstrates a solid security posture with HTTPS enforcement, modern security headers, and form protection via reCAPTCHA. The presence of cookie consent management aligns with privacy regulations such as GDPR. However, the lack of publicly available security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates gaps in transparency and formal security governance communication. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the website content. The security score is high but could be improved by publishing explicit security documentation and establishing clear channels for security incident reporting and vulnerability disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page detailing security controls and practices.
  2. Establish and publicize an incident response plan and contact channels for security issues.
  3. Implement and disclose a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  4. Provide contact information for a Data Protection Officer or privacy lead if applicable.
  5. Continue enhancing transparency around data protection and compliance efforts to build user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
MailerLite
Description
Digital marketing tools to grow your audience faster and drive revenue smarter. Backed by 24/7 award-winning support.
Key services
Email marketing, Automation, Newsletter editors, Transactional emails, Website builder, Landing pages, Signup forms, Email verifier, Digital product sales, E-commerce integrations
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Alpine.js, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Cookiebot, Growthbook, reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
Alpine.js
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Growthbook, 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 no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Content is rich, professional, and business-focused
  3. Strong presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  4. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  5. No direct phone numbers or physical addresses found in the provided content
  6. Multiple social media profiles linked and verified
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information publicly available
  8. WHOIS data is missing or protected, which is a minor trust consideration
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern JavaScript frameworks and libraries, including Alpine.js and jQuery, supported by Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot for analytics and consent management. The site is optimized for fast loading and mobile responsiveness, with well-structured meta tags and SEO best practices. Accessibility features are present, contributing to a positive user experience. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting details are not explicitly available but the use of Google services and CDN indicates a robust hosting environment. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports scalability, performance, and compliance requirements effectively.
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. 81/100 −3Low24 findingsView report
  2. 84/100 +10Low22 findingsView report
  3. 74/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with mailerlite.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 mailerlite.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.