Skip to main content

Security report for seafile.com

Seafile Ltd. · Technology · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Seafile Ltd. operates a professional website offering an open source, self-hosted file synchronization and sharing platform targeting teams, companies, and organizations globally. The company provides both on-premise and cloud-based solutions with advanced features such as AI-powered file property automation, collaborative document editing, and enterprise-grade security. The website demonstrates a strong market position with over one million users and notable customers including universities and cybersecurity firms. Technically, the site employs modern web technologies including Bootstrap, jQuery, and FontAwesome, with Google Analytics integrated for user tracking. The design is professional, mobile-optimized, and content-rich, supporting a positive user experience. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacking explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which raises some concerns about domain registration legitimacy but does not detract from the business credibility evidenced by the website content and customer references. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-maintained but would benefit from enhanced security headers and clearer domain registration transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

8 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

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

Keep watching seafile.com

This scan found 26 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
42
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
48

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

Seafile Ltd. positions itself as a key player in the file sync and share software market, leveraging open source and cloud technologies to serve a diverse customer base including educational institutions and enterprises. Its business model combines open source community engagement with commercial cloud and on-premise offerings. The company benefits from a strong ecosystem of partners and customers, as evidenced by logos of reputable organizations on the site. Revenue streams likely include subscriptions for cloud services and enterprise support. The company maintains a responsible disclosure policy, indicating a mature security culture. Growth indicators include a broad user base and active product development. Strategic partnerships with universities and cybersecurity firms enhance market credibility. The absence of direct contact information on the main site suggests a focus on online self-service and community support channels.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is used, ensuring encrypted communications, but no explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS were detected in the provided data. The presence of a responsible disclosure policy indicates awareness of vulnerability management. However, the lack of incident response contact details and cookie consent mechanisms suggests gaps in compliance and user privacy transparency. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The WHOIS data absence is a concern for domain legitimacy and could impact trust. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a software service provider but could be improved by implementing recommended security headers, enhancing privacy compliance, and publishing clear incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish clear incident response and security contact information to improve trust and facilitate vulnerability reporting.
  4. Verify and publish domain registration details to resolve WHOIS data inconsistencies and improve legitimacy perception.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance with accessibility standards and broaden user inclusivity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Seafile Ltd.
Description
Seafile is an open source, self-hosted file sync and share solution with high performance and reliability. Sync, access, and collaborate on files on your own server or private cloud.
Key services
File synchronization and sharing, Custom file properties and AI-powered automation, Collaborative document editing (SeaDoc), Collaborative wiki, Granular sharing permissions, Multi-level file tagging, Enterprise-grade security and compliance
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, jQuery, FontAwesome, Google Analytics
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS implied by external links (https://)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Responsible disclosure policy present

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  3. WHOIS data unavailable or domain possibly unregistered or WHOIS server issue
  4. Strong business presence with reputable customer logos
  5. Privacy and terms policies are present and comprehensive
  6. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main site
  7. No cookie consent banner detected
  8. Use of Google Analytics for tracking
  9. No explicit security headers detected in provided data
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack featuring Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for DOM manipulation, and FontAwesome for iconography. Google Analytics is used for visitor tracking. The site loads external scripts asynchronously to optimize performance. The HTML structure is valid and semantic, supporting SEO best practices. Mobile optimization is good with responsive navigation and layout. However, the site lacks explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are technical gaps. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the provided data. Performance is moderate, with potential for improvement through enhanced caching and resource optimization. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from security and privacy enhancements.
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 seafile.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 seafile.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.