Skip to main content

Security report for resellerratings.com

E-commerce · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ResellerRatings.com operates as an e-commerce review and price comparison platform, providing consumers with verified store ratings and customer reviews to aid in informed purchasing decisions. The website targets online shoppers seeking trustworthy feedback on stores and products. Technically, the site leverages modern JavaScript frameworks such as React, integrates with multiple marketing and analytics services including Google Adsense, Facebook SDK, and HubSpot, and is hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure. The site demonstrates good design quality, mobile optimization, and SEO practices, contributing to a positive user experience. However, the security posture shows gaps, notably the absence of visible security headers and lack of explicit privacy and cookie policies, which are critical for compliance and user trust. The WHOIS data is missing, raising concerns about domain registration transparency and trustworthiness. Overall, while the platform appears functional and professionally designed, improvements in security and privacy compliance are recommended to enhance credibility and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

5 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

  3. 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 resellerratings.com

This scan found 22 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
82
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
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

ResellerRatings.com positions itself in the competitive e-commerce sector as a trusted source for store reviews and price comparisons. Its business model revolves around aggregating verified customer feedback and facilitating product price comparisons, likely monetized through advertising networks such as Google Adsense and affiliate marketing. The platform appeals primarily to consumers seeking reliable information before making online purchases. The integration of marketing tools like HubSpot and G2 Crowd tracking indicates a focus on customer engagement and lead generation. The absence of detailed company information and registrant data limits full assessment of business scale and partnerships. Nonetheless, the site maintains consistent branding and a clear value proposition within the retail technology industry.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications, but lacks evidence of comprehensive security headers such as Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, or HSTS, which are essential to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No explicit security or incident response policies are found, nor are there contact channels dedicated to security issues. The use of multiple third-party scripts introduces potential attack surfaces, necessitating vigilant library management and vulnerability assessments. The missing WHOIS data and absence of privacy and cookie policies further weaken the security and compliance posture. While no immediate vulnerabilities are detected in the provided content, the site would benefit from enhanced security best practices and transparent privacy disclosures to align with GDPR and other regulations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add and configure essential security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to strengthen web security.
  3. Establish clear incident response and security contact channels to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Obtain and maintain accurate WHOIS registration data to enhance domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to identify and remediate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Compare prices and read store reviews by real customers, compare products.
Key services
store ratings, customer reviews, price comparison
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React (implied by React devtools hook), Google Adsense, Facebook SDK, HubSpot Feedback and Analytics, LaunchNotes embed
Frameworks
React
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
50/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
HubSpot Analytics, Scorecard Research
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, HubSpot Ads Pixel, Scorecard Research
Marketing tools
HubSpot Feedback, LaunchNotes, G2 Crowd Attribution Tracking
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. WHOIS data unavailable, indicating possible recent registration or privacy protection
  2. Website is a review and price comparison platform targeting consumers
  3. Uses multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools
  4. No visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies in provided content
  5. No explicit contact information or security policies found
  6. No WAF or blocking detected, site content fully accessible
  7. Good technical implementation with modern JS frameworks and AWS hosting
  8. Moderate security posture with room for improvement in headers and policies
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies, including React for frontend rendering and AWS for hosting, indicating a scalable and maintainable infrastructure. Integration with marketing and analytics platforms such as HubSpot, Facebook SDK, and Google Adsense suggests a mature digital marketing strategy. The site is mobile-optimized and employs responsive design principles. However, the absence of a detected CMS suggests a custom or proprietary platform. Performance appears moderate, with potential for optimization in script loading and resource management. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO practices are adequately implemented through meta tags and structured data. Technical debt appears minimal but could be reduced by consolidating third-party dependencies and enhancing security configurations.
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 resellerratings.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 resellerratings.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.