Skip to main content

Security report for smilee.fi

Smilee.io · Technology · Panama

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Smilee.io is a technology company founded in 2016 that provides a comprehensive chat solution for sales and customer service, leveraging AI chatbots and live chat capabilities. The company targets businesses seeking to enhance customer engagement and sales through advanced chat technologies. Their market position is that of a specialized SaaS provider with a focus on AI-driven chat solutions. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using Elementor and Astra theme, integrating multiple marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and VWO, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain status good, but lacks advanced DNS security (no DNSSEC) and security headers, which could be improved. Privacy compliance is basic with a cookie consent mechanism but no explicit privacy policy or terms of service detected. Overall, the website is professional and functional but could enhance trust and compliance by adding clear privacy and security policies and contact information.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 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. 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. 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 smilee.fi

This scan found 24 issues across 5 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
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
69

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

Smilee.io operates in the technology sector, providing SaaS chat solutions that combine AI chatbots and live chat for sales and customer service. Their business model focuses on subscription-based software services targeting businesses that require efficient customer interaction tools. The company maintains an active marketing ecosystem with integrations to HubSpot, Google Analytics, and Facebook Ads, supporting lead generation and customer engagement. The domain age and privacy-protected WHOIS registration align with a legitimate small technology company. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram supports brand visibility. No direct contact details or certifications were found, suggesting opportunities to improve transparency and customer trust.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communication, and the domain is registered with a privacy protection service, which is common for technology companies. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options indicates room for improvement in defense-in-depth strategies. The use of multiple third-party scripts for analytics and marketing increases the attack surface and necessitates regular security audits. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which could hinder rapid response to security incidents. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing recommended security headers, DNSSEC, and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to protect against common web attacks.
  4. Provide clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility and customer support.
  5. Establish and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Smilee.io
Description
Smilee.io provides a complete chat solution for sales and customer service, including AI chatbots, live chat, and expert service to boost customer service and sales.
Key services
AI Chatbots, Live Chat, Customer Service Chat Solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, VWO (Visual Website Optimizer), HubSpot, Elementor, WordPress
Frameworks
WordPress, Elementor
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No DNSSEC
  • Domain status OK

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, HubSpot Analytics, VWO
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
HubSpot Ads, Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, VWO
Marketing tools
HubSpot, VWO, Hotjar
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress site using Elementor and Astra theme
  2. Multiple marketing and analytics scripts are loaded, indicating active marketing efforts
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found in the analyzed content
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is present via Complianz GDPR plugin
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the content
  6. Social media presence includes Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  8. No explicit security headers detected in HTML content
  9. HTTPS is enabled and domain status is OK
  10. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using the Elementor page builder and Astra theme, which supports responsive design and good SEO practices. The integration of multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and VWO indicates a sophisticated approach to user behavior tracking and conversion optimization. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in loading speed by optimizing third-party scripts. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimization is good with proper meta tags and structured data. Hosting provider details are not explicit, but domain registration is via NameCheap with privacy protection. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts which require ongoing security monitoring.
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 smilee.fi. 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 smilee.fi.

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.