Skip to main content

Security report for rent.com

Rent.com · Real Estate · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Rent.com operates as a large-scale online real estate rental marketplace focused on providing users in the United States with access to apartments, houses, condos, and townhouses for rent. The platform offers key services such as property search, saved listings, rental price estimation, and business solutions for landlords. The website is built on modern web technologies including React and Next.js, hosted on AWS CloudFront, and integrates analytics and marketing tools like Datadog RUM and Google Tag Manager. However, the site currently lacks a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which is a critical security deficiency. Additionally, privacy and cookie policies are not detected, and no explicit contact information is provided, which impacts user trust and compliance. The domain registration data aligns well with the business claims, showing consistent DNS and MX records without privacy protection masking. Overall, while the business model and technical infrastructure are solid, the security posture and privacy compliance require urgent improvements to enhance trustworthiness and user safety.

Scanned

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

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 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

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

Keep watching rent.com

This scan found 17 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
50
Security headers
20
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
55

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

Rent.com holds a strong market position as an established rental platform in the US real estate sector, targeting renters seeking residential properties. Its business model centers on connecting renters with landlords and property managers through an online marketplace and mobile applications. The company benefits from partnerships with identity services and leverages third-party analytics and advertising networks. Growth indicators include extensive geographic coverage and a comprehensive set of rental search features. However, the lack of explicit business contact information and privacy policies may hinder full trust and regulatory compliance. The platform's integration with major cloud and analytics providers suggests a mature digital infrastructure.

Security posture

The current security maturity level of Rent.com is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS, which is a critical vulnerability exposing user data to interception. The lack of HSTS, OCSP stapling, and modern TLS protocols further weakens the security posture. While no known critical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, the missing encryption and minimal security headers represent significant compliance and risk gaps. Privacy compliance is poor, with no visible GDPR indicators or cookie consent mechanisms. Incident response and security policy documentation are not found, indicating limited transparency and preparedness. These issues pose risks to user trust and regulatory adherence.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate immediately to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance and user consent mechanisms.
  3. Publish contact information including security incident response contacts to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Enhance security headers and enable HSTS, OCSP stapling, and modern TLS protocols to strengthen security posture.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure minimal privacy impact and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a modern React and Next.js framework, leveraging server-side rendering and AWS CloudFront for content delivery. It integrates advanced analytics via Datadog RUM and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager. The site promotes mobile app usage, indicating a mobile-first approach. However, performance metrics are not available, and the SSL/TLS configuration is absent, which is a significant technical risk. The DNS setup is robust with multiple A records and Google MX servers, but lacks DNSSEC and CAA records. The site uses multiple CSS and JavaScript chunks for modular loading, indicating a complex frontend architecture. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimization is good with proper meta tags and canonical links.
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. 55/100Medium24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with rent.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 rent.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.