Skip to main content

Security report for myfilerunner.com

MyFileRunner · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

MyFileRunner is a specialized legal technology service provider offering secure and accurate eFiling solutions primarily targeting law firms in Texas, Illinois, and California. The company provides both full-service and self-service eFiling options, along with additional services such as eService, reporting, corporate billing, and case management integration. Positioned as a top-rated service with 24/7 expert support, MyFileRunner aims to streamline legal filing processes and improve law firm efficiency. The website is built on a mature WordPress infrastructure enhanced with modern plugins and performance optimizations like NitroPack. The technical setup includes integration with Google reCAPTCHA v3 for form security and AWS-based hosting inferred from DNS records. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, SEO practices, and accessibility at a basic level. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS with strong domain locking via registrar status flags, though DNSSEC is not enabled. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, which is a gap in transparency. Privacy and cookie policies are present with a consent mechanism, but GDPR compliance indicators are minimal. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be improved with additional policy disclosures and DNSSEC. The domain is well aged (since 2003) and registered with GoDaddy without privacy protection, consistent with a legitimate business. Contact information is clear and professional, including toll-free and local phone numbers, a physical address in Texas, and a company support email. No suspicious or malicious indicators were found. Strategic recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, publishing security and incident response policies, and adding terms of service to enhance legal clarity and trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

7 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • 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. 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

    • 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 myfilerunner.com

This scan found 27 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
60

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

MyFileRunner operates in the legal technology sector, focusing on eFiling services for law firms in select US states. Its competitive advantage lies in offering both full-service and self-service filing options, backed by 24/7 expert support and integration with existing legal practice management tools. The business model is service-oriented with revenue likely generated from filing fees, subscriptions, and corporate billing solutions. The company targets small to medium law firms handling family law, personal injury, and civil litigation cases. The website content and testimonials indicate a customer-centric approach emphasizing accuracy, efficiency, and error reduction. The firm appears to be independent with no parent or subsidiary companies identified. Growth indicators include a regularly updated blog and training resources, suggesting ongoing engagement with the legal community.

Security posture

The security maturity of MyFileRunner is moderate to high. The website uses HTTPS exclusively, employs Google reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms, and the domain is locked with multiple registrar status flags preventing unauthorized changes. However, the absence of DNSSEC leaves a minor DNS security gap. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is published, and no incident response contact channels are visible, which limits transparency and readiness perception. Privacy policies exist but lack comprehensive GDPR compliance details. No vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, the site follows good security practices but would benefit from enhanced policy disclosures and DNS security improvements to align with best practices and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS integrity and security.
  2. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Develop and publish terms of service to clarify user agreements and legal protections.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
MyFileRunner
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
MyFileRunner
Description
Accurate, secure legal eFiling for law firms in Texas, Illinois, and California. Simplify your filing process with MyFileRunner’s expert support.
Key services
Full-Service eFiling, Self-Service eFiling, eService (document serving), Additional legal filing services, Reporting and corporate billing, Case management integration
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WPBakery Page Builder, Ultimate VC Addons, NitroPack optimization, jQuery, FontAwesome, Google reCAPTCHA v3
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Domain locked with multiple client protection statuses

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
NitroPack analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well structured for legal eFiling services.
  2. Clear contact information and multiple service offerings targeted at law firms.
  3. Use of modern web technologies and performance optimization tools.
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
  5. Privacy and cookie policies are present but could be more comprehensive.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  7. Domain is mature and well managed with appropriate registrar protections.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with WPBakery Page Builder and Ultimate VC Addons, optimized using NitroPack for performance. It uses jQuery and FontAwesome for UI elements and Google reCAPTCHA v3 for form security. Hosting is likely on AWS, inferred from DNS nameservers. The site demonstrates fast loading times, good mobile responsiveness, and basic accessibility compliance. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. No deprecated or vulnerable libraries were detected. The technical infrastructure is modern and well maintained, though enabling DNSSEC and improving accessibility would further strengthen the platform.
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 myfilerunner.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 myfilerunner.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.