Skip to main content

Security report for submit-form.com

Formspark · Technology · Iceland

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Formspark is a technology-focused SaaS company founded in 2018, providing a backend service that connects web forms to email and other integrations without requiring users to manage servers or databases. The company targets agencies, freelancers, developers, and marketing teams, positioning itself as a reliable and easy-to-use form backend solution trusted by over 20,000 companies. The website is professionally designed with excellent content quality and clear navigation, supporting multiple languages and integrations with popular platforms such as Slack, Zapier, and various spam protection services. Technically, the website leverages modern frameworks including Next.js and React, hosted on AWS infrastructure. It demonstrates good performance, mobile optimization, and SEO practices. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced, secure form handling, and multiple anti-spam protections, although some security headers are not explicitly detected and DNSSEC is not enabled. Privacy compliance is good with a comprehensive privacy policy and GDPR page, but lacks a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the security maturity is solid for a small SaaS provider, with no visible vulnerabilities or suspicious patterns. The domain registration is privacy protected but consistent with the business profile and age. Contact information is available via email and support forms, with active social media presence. No critical issues were found, and the website is safe for general audiences. Strategic recommendations include implementing security headers, enabling DNSSEC, publishing a formal security policy and vulnerability disclosure program, and adding cookie consent to enhance privacy compliance and trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

6 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 submit-form.com

This scan found 22 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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
70

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

Formspark operates in the competitive SaaS market for form backend services, differentiating itself through ease of use, broad platform integrations, and strong spam protection features. Its business model is subscription-based with a free trial, targeting developers and marketing professionals who require reliable form data collection without infrastructure overhead. The company has established a credible market presence with over 20,000 customers and partnerships with major platforms. Growth indicators include multi-language support and collaboration features. The company maintains a transparent support and contact ecosystem, enhancing customer trust and retention.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and secure form submission endpoints. Integration of multiple spam protection services (Botpoison, reCAPTCHA, hCaptcha, Turnstile, Akismet) reduces risk of abuse. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and missing DNSSEC implementation represent areas for improvement. Incident response contact is available via abuse reporting and support email. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. GDPR compliance is indicated through dedicated pages. Overall, the security culture appears proactive but could benefit from formalized policies and enhanced DNS security.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS integrity and prevent spoofing.
  3. Publish a formal security policy and vulnerability disclosure program to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply fully with privacy regulations and enhance user trust.
  5. Consider appointing and publishing Data Protection Officer contact details to strengthen GDPR compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Formspark
Description
Formspark provides a backend service for forms, allowing users to connect forms to email without managing servers, databases, or analytics. It targets agencies, freelancers, developers, and marketing teams.
Key services
Form to email submission service, Dashboard for submission management, Integrations with Slack, Zapier, Make, Integromat, Spam protection with Botpoison, reCAPTCHA, hCaptcha, Turnstile, Akismet, Customization of forms and email templates, Collaboration features with workspace members
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Next.js, React, AWS DNS (Amazon Route 53), FontAwesome icons, JavaScript, CSS
Frameworks
Next.js, React
Platforms
AWS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Spam protection integrations (Botpoison, reCAPTCHA, hCaptcha, Turnstile, Akismet)
  • Secure form submission via HTTPS

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking mechanisms.
  2. Content is comprehensive and professionally presented.
  3. Strong focus on form backend services with multiple integrations.
  4. Good security posture with HTTPS and spam protection.
  5. Lacks explicit cookie consent mechanism.
  6. WHOIS privacy protection is used but justified.
  7. No exposed vulnerabilities or suspicious domains detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack using Next.js and React, ensuring fast performance and excellent mobile responsiveness. Hosting on AWS provides reliable infrastructure and scalability. The site uses FontAwesome for icons and standard CSS for styling. SEO and accessibility are well addressed with proper meta tags and responsive design. No CMS is detected, indicating a custom or framework-based build. The site loads efficiently with deferred JavaScript and preloaded CSS. Technical risks are minimal, but enabling DNSSEC and adding security headers would further harden the infrastructure.
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. 71/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with submit-form.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 submit-form.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.