Skip to main content

Security report for pandadoc.com

PandaDoc Inc. · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

PandaDoc Inc. is a leading technology company specializing in document automation, e-signature, and workflow management solutions. With a strong market position supported by over 50,000 clients, PandaDoc offers a comprehensive suite of services including CPQ, deal rooms, smart content, and analytics. The company targets businesses seeking to streamline their document workflows and improve sales efficiency through digital transformation. Their business model is SaaS-based, providing scalable solutions integrated with major CRM and productivity platforms. Technically, PandaDoc employs a modern technology stack including JavaScript frameworks, HubSpot forms, and various marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager and VWO. The website is hosted on AWS and uses WordPress CMS with WPML for multilingual support. While the site is rich in content and well-structured, performance is currently slow, and SSL configuration is incomplete, impacting security and user experience. From a security perspective, PandaDoc demonstrates strong compliance with industry standards including SOC 2, HIPAA, GDPR, E-SIGN, and UETA. They implement two-factor authentication and provide secure electronic signature capabilities. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and missing security headers represent critical areas for improvement. The site uses cookie consent mechanisms and maintains comprehensive privacy and terms of service policies. Overall, PandaDoc presents a high-trust, professional online presence with robust business credibility and compliance. Addressing technical and security gaps will enhance their security posture and user trust, supporting their strategic growth in the competitive document management market.

Scanned

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

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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

4 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 Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching pandadoc.com

This scan found 12 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
50
Security headers
85
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
66

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

PandaDoc holds a strong market position as a comprehensive agreement management platform, integrating deeply with CRM systems like Salesforce, HubSpot, and Pipedrive, as well as productivity tools like Google Workspace and Slack. Their competitive advantage lies in their extensive compliance certifications and a broad ecosystem of integrations, enabling seamless workflow automation. The business model focuses on subscription-based SaaS offerings with tiered plans from free trials to enterprise solutions. Revenue streams include software subscriptions, professional services, and premium support. Target customers are primarily medium to large enterprises across technology, professional services, healthcare, and education sectors. The company shows strategic partnerships with key technology providers and maintains a strong brand presence through customer testimonials and industry certifications.

Security posture

PandaDoc exhibits a mature security posture with adherence to multiple compliance frameworks such as SOC 2, HIPAA, and GDPR, ensuring data protection and regulatory compliance. The presence of two-factor authentication and digital signature certificates enhances identity verification and document integrity. However, the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of critical security headers like HSTS and CSP expose the site to potential risks. No evident vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The company lacks publicly visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies, which could be areas for future enhancement. Overall, the security culture appears strong but would benefit from improved SSL management and security header implementation.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and maintain a valid SSL certificate to enable HTTPS and secure data transmission.
  2. Implement essential security headers such as HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  3. Conduct regular security audits of third-party scripts and dependencies to prevent vulnerabilities.
  4. Develop and publish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies to enhance transparency and trust.
  5. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience across devices.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
PandaDoc Inc.
Registration number
Company Number of
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern JavaScript-based frontend, likely React, integrated with HubSpot for forms and marketing automation. It uses multiple third-party services for analytics (Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics, VWO) and cookie consent management (OneTrust). The CMS is WordPress with WPML for multilingual support. Hosting is on AWS, indicated by DNS records and badges. Performance is suboptimal with a load time of over 16 seconds and a large page size (~1MB). Accessibility and SEO optimizations are good, with proper meta tags and structured data. Technical debt is indicated by missing SSL and security headers, which should be prioritized for remediation to reduce operational risks.
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. 74/100Medium18 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with pandadoc.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 pandadoc.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.