Skip to main content

Security report for review-widget.net

Technology · N/a

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website www.review-widget.net provides a SaaS platform focused on offering Google review widgets that can be embedded into various website systems to enhance customer trust and increase sales. The service targets website owners and businesses seeking to showcase their Google My Business reviews easily without coding. The platform offers multiple widget templates and a review invitation tool to automate the collection of positive reviews. The website demonstrates a professional design with good content quality and clear navigation, optimized for mobile devices. Technically, the site leverages modern web technologies including Google Maps API, Google Tag Manager, and Cookiebot for cookie consent management. The site is served over HTTPS, ensuring secure communication. However, there is no evidence of advanced security headers, and no explicit contact or security policy pages were found. The site integrates analytics and tracking services with appropriate cookie consent mechanisms, indicating a moderate level of privacy compliance. From a security perspective, the site shows good basic practices such as HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks visible security headers and explicit incident response contacts. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a concern, as it suggests the domain may not be properly registered or the data is privacy protected, which impacts trustworthiness. No vulnerabilities or malicious content were detected. Overall, the website is functional, professional, and privacy-aware but would benefit from improved transparency regarding domain registration, contact information, and enhanced security headers. Strategic recommendations include verifying domain registration, publishing clear contact and security policies, and implementing additional security headers to strengthen the security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  2. 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 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';…

  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 review-widget.net

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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
95
Average
56
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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

The business operates in the technology sector, specifically providing embeddable Google review widgets as a SaaS offering. Its competitive advantage lies in ease of use, free and paid plans, and support for multiple website platforms including WordPress, Wix, Shopify, and others. The business model is subscription-based with a free tier to attract users. The target customers are small to medium-sized businesses and website owners looking to leverage social proof for increased sales. The presence on Product Hunt and integration with Google services indicates active marketing and partnership efforts. Growth potential exists in expanding widget templates and enhancing automation tools. However, the lack of visible company registration and contact details may limit trust among enterprise clients.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR. The use of Cookiebot and Google Tag Manager indicates awareness of privacy and tracking controls. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no dedicated security contact channels were found. The lack of WHOIS data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and potential risks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small SaaS provider but requires improvements to meet higher compliance and trust standards.

Recommendations

  1. Verify and publish domain registration details to improve trust and legitimacy.
  2. Add explicit contact information including support and security incident contacts.
  3. Implement and configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan accessible from the website.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies for vulnerabilities and update accordingly.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
100% free Google Review Widget. Embed into your website in 2 minutes. No coding necessary. Get your free widget now!
Key services
Google review widgets, Review invitation tool, Widget templates for multiple platforms
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Maps API, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, JavaScript, HTML5, CSS3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website offers free and paid Google review widgets with easy embedding.
  2. Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented and accessible.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main page.
  4. WHOIS data unavailable, raising questions about domain registration status.
  5. Use of multiple external trusted services like Google APIs and Cookiebot.
  6. No signs of adult or malicious content.
  7. Good SEO and mobile optimization observed.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Maps API for place search, Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking, and Cookiebot for cookie consent management. The HTML and CSS are well structured with responsive design for mobile optimization. The site loads multiple external scripts asynchronously to improve performance. SEO is supported with meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for local business aggregate ratings. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site approach. Hosting provider details are not evident from the content. Performance appears moderate with some external dependencies. Accessibility features are basic but present. Opportunities exist to enhance security headers and improve contact transparency.
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 review-widget.net. 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 review-widget.net.

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.