Security report for shipstation.com
ShipStation · Technology · United States
Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and DNS health.
ShipStation is a leading ecommerce shipping software platform that serves hundreds of thousands of online sellers, ranging from small businesses to large enterprises. The company offers a comprehensive suite of services including order management, rate shopping, inventory synchronization, label printing, and returns management, all integrated with over 200 carriers. Their platform is designed to streamline ecommerce fulfillment, reduce shipping costs, and increase operational efficiency. The website reflects a mature digital presence with strong branding, clear messaging, and extensive product information. Technically, ShipStation's website is built on WordPress with a custom theme and leverages modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, along with advanced analytics and marketing tools including Segment, Hotjar, HubSpot, and Optimizely. The site is well-optimized for SEO, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility, indicating a high level of digital maturity. Security is robust with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, though explicit security headers and policies could be improved. The security posture is solid with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of a public security policy, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure reduces transparency. The WHOIS data for the domain is unavailable, which is a minor concern but common for commercial entities using privacy protection. Overall, the site demonstrates a professional and trustworthy ecommerce SaaS business. Strategically, ShipStation should consider publishing detailed security and incident response policies, implementing security.txt files, and enhancing transparency around data protection officers to further strengthen trust and compliance. Continued investment in security best practices and privacy compliance will support their market leadership and customer confidence.
Scanned
NIS2 and GDPR posture
- GDPR outside view
- 88/ 100 · Low
- Checks completed
- 7of 7
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
- (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
- (b) Incident handling: One indicator
- (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
- (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
- (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
- (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
- (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
- (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
- (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
- (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
3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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
- RFC 8996
- RFC 7568
- Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: tls_versions TLSv1.2, TLSv1.3
- NIS2 21(2)(h)
- IR 2024/2690 9.2(b): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(b): Cryptography
- NIST SC-8(1): NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-8(1): Cryptographic Protection
- 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
- NIS2 21(2)(h)
- IR 2024/2690 9.2(b): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(b): Cryptography
- NIST SC-13: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-13: Cryptographic Protection
- High
DNS health
DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.
- High
Potential Subdomain Takeover
Subdomain dev.shipstation.com points to unregistered service dev01-shipstation-com-vpc-1243199168.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com
What to do: Remove or fix CNAME record to prevent subdomain takeover
- WSTG-CONF-10
- NIS2 21(2)(i)
- IR 2024/2690 12.4: Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 12.4: Asset inventory
- NIST CM-8: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-8: System Component Inventory
- High
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
Keep watching shipstation.com
This scan found 16 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
- 47
- Security headers
- 95
- Email security
- 80
- DNS health
- 65
- Network security
- 100
- GDPR outside view
- 88
- Average
- 79
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
Security posture
Recommendations
- Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security controls and practices.
- Implement and declare security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
- Create and maintain a vulnerability disclosure program and publish a security.txt file.
- Provide clear contact information for a Data Protection Officer or security team.
- Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to ensure privacy compliance and minimize risk.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
- Company
- ShipStation
- Description
- The fulfillment engine behind hundreds of thousands of online sellers, ShipStation combines order management, rate shopping, inventory, and returns all in one platform, delivering 15x more labels per hour and up to 90% shipping discounts through 200+ carriers.
- Key services
- Shipping management, Order management, Inventory synchronization, Rate shopping, Label printing, Returns management, API access
- Content quality
- excellent
- Branding
- consistent
Technology
- Stack
- jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, Segment Analytics, Hotjar, Optimizely, HubSpot, WordPress
- Frameworks
- WordPress theme: shipstation-blocks
- Platforms
- WordPress CMS
- Performance
- moderate
- Mobile
- good
- Accessibility
- good
- SEO
- excellent
Security
- Observed score
- 85/100
- Good practices seen
- HTTPS enforced
- Use of analytics with obfuscation
- Cookie consent mechanism implemented
- No exposed sensitive data in HTML
Analytics and tracking
- Services
- Segment Analytics, Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar, HubSpot Analytics
- Tracking level
- extensive
- Privacy practices
- good
Advertising
- Ad networks
- Bing Ads, Reddit Ads
- Tracking pixels
- Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Spotify Pixel, 6sense
- Marketing tools
- HubSpot, Segment Analytics, Optimizely
- Transparency
- good
Site quality
- Design
- excellent
- User experience
- excellent
- Content relevance
- excellent
- Navigation
- excellent
- Professionalism
- excellent
- Trustworthiness
- high
Key observations
- Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking mechanisms.
- Strong use of modern analytics and marketing tools.
- Comprehensive SEO and structured data implementation.
- No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
- WHOIS data is missing, which impacts trust but not conclusively suspicious.
- Good privacy and cookie policy presence with consent mechanisms.
- No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected.
Technical notes
Notes
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.
- MITRE CWE (opens in a new tab)4.20 (2026-04-30) · CWE Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP Top 10:2025 (opens in a new tab)2025 (membership per CWE 4.20) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- MITRE CAPEC (opens in a new tab)3.9 (2023-01-24) · CAPEC Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP ASVS (opens in a new tab)5.0.0 · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (opens in a new tab)latest (checklist.json, master) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Secure Headers Project (opens in a new tab)2026-10-18 · Apache-2.0
- Mozilla Server Side TLS (intermediate) (opens in a new tab)6.0 · MPL-2.0
- NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 (OSCAL catalog) (opens in a new tab)5.2.0 · Public domain (US Government work)
- Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 333, 27.12.2022 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 (opens in a new tab)OJ L, 18.10.2024 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy), consolidated (opens in a new tab)19.12.2009 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- RFC Editor metadata (opens in a new tab)per-RFC (obsolete RFCs rejected) · IETF Trust Legal Provisions (metadata only)
- NIST CSRC, W3C TR, IETF Datatracker, EDPB, EUR-Lex CELLAR and gesetze-bayern.de (opens in a new tab)per document · Titles and links only
- NIST NVD CVE API 2.0 (opens in a new tab)live records · Public domain (NVD); CVE® records © MITRE, free use
- W3C WCAG 2.2 (opens in a new tab)W3C Recommendation (wcag.json) · W3C Software and Document License
- ETSI EN 301 549 (opens in a new tab)V3.2.1 (2021-03), clause headings · Clause numbers and titles only (© ETSI)
- Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 151, 7.6.2019 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive (EU) 2016/2102 (Web Accessibility Directive) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 327, 2.12.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Retrieved 2026-10-25
Earlier scans of this domain
- 82/100Low24 findingsView report
Feedback on this report
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with shipstation.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review shipstation.com.