Skip to main content

Security report for readmepreview.com

ReadMe · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ReadMe is a technology company providing a SaaS platform focused on creating beautiful product and API documentation tailored for developers and product teams. The platform positions itself as a developer-friendly solution to streamline documentation efforts, supporting the needs of modern software teams. The website content and branding are consistent and professional, targeting a medium-sized business audience with a focus on technology and developer tools. The company was founded around 2016, consistent with the domain registration date, and operates in the technology sector with a SaaS business model.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

6 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. 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook

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

  3. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

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

Keep watching readmepreview.com

This scan found 18 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
60
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

ReadMe operates in a competitive market of developer documentation platforms, leveraging a SaaS model with key services including API and product documentation hubs. The company integrates with multiple third-party services such as Stripe for payments, HubSpot for marketing, and Drift for live chat, indicating a mature digital ecosystem. The absence of explicit contact information or detailed business disclosures on the login page suggests that such information may be available elsewhere on the main site. The company demonstrates moderate market positioning with a focus on developer experience and product usability.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses reputable third-party services for payments and analytics, which is a positive security indicator. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS reduces the overall security posture. No privacy or cookie policies were found on the login page, indicating potential compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. The site does not expose sensitive data in the HTML, and no WAF or blocking mechanisms were detected, allowing full content access. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved by implementing DNSSEC, security headers, and clear privacy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing attacks.
  2. Implement and publish security headers such as CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Add clear and accessible privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  4. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing contact information for security incidents and general inquiries.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ReadMe
Description
Create beautiful product and API documentation with our developer friendly platform.
Key services
API documentation, Product documentation, Developer hubs
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, AngularJS (some angular-ui-tree), Stripe (payment processing), Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Drift (chat), HubSpot, AdRoll, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
React, AngularJS
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No DNSSEC (not enabled)
  • Use of Stripe for payments with publishable key
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics, Amplitude
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
AdRoll
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, HubSpot Ads Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Drift
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a login page for ReadMe SaaS platform.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service links found on this page.
  3. Multiple third-party marketing and analytics scripts are loaded.
  4. No direct contact information or security policies found on this page.
  5. Use of HTTPS and modern JavaScript frameworks observed.
  6. No DNSSEC enabled which is a minor security gap.
  7. No security headers detected in provided data.
  8. No signs of WAF or content blocking.
  9. Content is professional and targeted at developers and product teams.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including React and AngularJS frameworks, supported by a variety of third-party services for analytics, marketing, and payments. Hosting appears to be cloud-based with Cloudflare DNS services. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags present but no advanced structured data or rich snippets detected. The site loads multiple asynchronous scripts for tracking and marketing, indicating extensive user behavior monitoring. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in security headers and privacy compliance are recommended to reduce risk.
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 readmepreview.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 readmepreview.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.