Skip to main content

Security report for maze.co

Maze · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

88/100

Risk levelLow

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

Maze is a technology company providing a SaaS user research platform designed for modern product teams. The platform enables teams to conduct user interviews, usability tests, and surveys efficiently, leveraging AI to accelerate insights and decision-making. With over 60,000 teams using Maze, it holds a strong market position in the user research domain, supported by notable customers such as Atlassian and Volvo. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with excellent content quality and user experience. Technically, Maze employs modern web technologies including Gatsby and React, supported by analytics and marketing tools like Segment, Amplitude, and Facebook Pixel. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and SEO, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The use of a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism demonstrates attention to privacy compliance. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS, employs standard security headers, and avoids exposing sensitive data. However, it lacks a dedicated security policy page and explicit incident response contacts, which are recommended for enhanced transparency and trust. No vulnerabilities or suspicious patterns were detected in the WHOIS data or site content. Overall, Maze presents a low-risk profile with strong business credibility and technical maturity. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security and incident response policies, and establishing a vulnerability disclosure program to further strengthen security posture and stakeholder confidence.

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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  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

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

Keep watching maze.co

This scan found 11 issues across 5 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
77
Security headers
80
Email security
100
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
88

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 maze.co, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1,638
Employees
0
Customers
1,638
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
8%

5 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 maze.co.

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

Maze operates in the technology sector, focusing on user research solutions for product teams. Its SaaS business model offers tools for recruiting participants, conducting moderated and automated interviews, and analyzing user feedback. The platform's AI capabilities provide competitive advantages by accelerating research cycles. The company targets product managers, UX researchers, and designers seeking rapid and reliable user insights. Partnerships with major enterprises and a large user base indicate strong market traction. The website's content and customer logos reinforce Maze's positioning as a trusted leader in user research technology.

Security posture

Maze demonstrates a solid security posture with HTTPS enforcement and multiple security headers implemented. The cookie consent mechanism is comprehensive, supporting GDPR compliance. No exposed sensitive information or vulnerable libraries were identified. However, the absence of a public security policy and incident response contact details represents a compliance gap. Additionally, no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present, limiting transparency for security researchers. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be improved by formalizing and publishing security governance documents and response procedures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance transparency around data protection officer contact information if applicable.
  5. Regularly review and update cookie and privacy policies to maintain compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Maze
Description
Maze is a user research platform that enables product teams to run user interviews, usability tests, and surveys to unlock user research insights at the speed of product development.
Key services
User interviews, Usability testing, Surveys, AI moderated interviews, Recruitment tools, Automated reporting
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Gatsby 5.14.5, React, Segment analytics, Google Tag Manager, Amplitude, Facebook Pixel, CookieYes consent management
Frameworks
Gatsby, React
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular categories
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security headers

Analytics and tracking

Services
Segment, Amplitude, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
HubSpot Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Segment Analytics, Amplitude
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Segment, Amplitude
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 challenges.
  2. Strong cookie consent mechanism with detailed categories and user controls.
  3. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  4. Clear business focus on user research platform with AI capabilities.
  5. Multiple calls to action for signup and demo requests.
  6. Presence of major customer logos enhances trust.
  7. No direct contact emails or phone numbers visible; contact primarily via forms.
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Gatsby and React, indicating a modern static site generation approach optimized for performance and SEO. Integration with analytics platforms like Segment, Amplitude, and Google Tag Manager supports robust data collection and marketing efforts. The use of DatoCMS as a content management system facilitates content updates and management. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility considerations. Hosting appears to leverage CDNs for fast content delivery. No technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected, suggesting a well-maintained infrastructure. Opportunities exist to enhance security documentation and incident response readiness.
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. 85/100 +1Low21 findingsView report
  2. 84/100 −1Low22 findingsView report
  3. 85/100Low18 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with maze.co. 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 maze.co.

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.