Skip to main content

Security report for retino.com

Retino · E-commerce · N/a

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

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Retino is a SaaS company providing automated post-purchase care solutions for e-commerce businesses, focusing on shipment tracking and returns management. The company targets online stores seeking to improve customer satisfaction and operational efficiency. The website is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA Enterprise usage, though explicit security policies and incident response information are lacking. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a notable concern, reducing trustworthiness despite the professional website presence. Overall, Retino presents as a credible e-commerce technology provider with room for improvement in transparency and security disclosures.

Scanned

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

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 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching retino.com

This scan found 24 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
40
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
68
Average
58

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

Retino operates in the e-commerce technology sector, offering tools that automate post-purchase processes such as shipment tracking and returns handling. With over 2,000 online stores as customers, it holds a medium market presence. The business model is subscription-based SaaS, integrating with popular e-commerce platforms. The company emphasizes time savings and customer satisfaction as competitive advantages. The website's ecosystem includes dedicated documentation and application subdomains, supporting customer onboarding and usage. However, the lack of publicly available WHOIS data and direct contact information may impact perceived credibility among cautious clients or partners.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and employs advanced bot protection via Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise. It uses multiple tracking and analytics services with user consent mechanisms in place, reflecting good privacy practices. However, the absence of explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure channels indicates gaps in security transparency. No security headers beyond HTTPS are explicitly confirmed, suggesting potential improvements. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced by publishing formal security documentation and providing direct security contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to improve transparency.
  2. Add explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options to harden security.
  3. Provide direct company contact emails and phone numbers for sales and support to enhance trust.
  4. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to minimize security risks and maintain privacy compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Retino
Description
Retino is a tool for e-shops that automates post-purchase care and saves up to 75% of time. It integrates easily with most e-commerce platforms and supports multiple solutions within one service. Retino Tracking offers an overview of shipments on the e-shop -> customer route, reduces the number of undelivered shipments, and increases customer satisfaction. Retino Returns focuses on managing returns and claims from A to Z.
Key services
Post-purchase care automation, Shipment tracking, Returns and claims management, Customer notifications
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics (gtag.js), Google reCAPTCHA Enterprise, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Microsoft Clarity, FreePrivacyPolicy.com cookie consent
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA Enterprise for forms
  • Cookie consent with opt-in tracking scripts
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and reduces trust.
  3. Strong privacy and cookie consent mechanisms implemented.
  4. Use of multiple reputable analytics and marketing tools.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found; only contact form.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  7. No terms of service page detected.
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  9. Website is mobile optimized and accessible.
  10. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern tech stack including Django backend (inferred), Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, and Microsoft Clarity. It uses asynchronous loading for scripts and a cookie consent mechanism to manage tracking. The site is mobile responsive with good accessibility and SEO optimization. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple external scripts. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. The site uses secure HTTPS connections and integrates reCAPTCHA Enterprise for form security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is robust and well-implemented with minor opportunities for optimization and enhanced security headers.
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. 58/100Medium33 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with retino.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 retino.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.