Skip to main content

Security report for trackjs.com

TrackJS LLC · Technology · United States

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

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

TrackJS LLC is a small US-based technology company specializing in JavaScript error monitoring solutions for frontend web applications. Their SaaS platform provides developers with detailed telemetry and error tracking tools to proactively identify and fix bugs, improving user experience and reducing debugging time. The company targets developers and businesses requiring reliable JavaScript error monitoring and offers integrations with popular frameworks such as React, Angular, Node.js, and Next.js. Their market position is that of a focused niche player with a strong developer-centric approach and a subscription-based business model. Technically, the website demonstrates a mature digital infrastructure with modern JavaScript frameworks and libraries, including React, Angular, and Node.js. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility. Analytics and monitoring tools such as PostHog and Request Metrics are integrated for user behavior and performance tracking. The website uses HTTPS with a valid SSL configuration, though explicit security headers are not visibly set in the HTML content. From a security perspective, TrackJS shows good practices by avoiding collection of sensitive user data, providing privacy controls, and using asynchronous non-blocking scripts to minimize performance impact. However, the absence of a cookie consent mechanism and explicit security headers are areas for improvement. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are publicly available, which could be enhanced to build further trust. The WHOIS data confirms domain legitimacy and consistency with the business information. Overall, TrackJS presents a professional, trustworthy, and technically sound web presence with a strong focus on developer needs. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance and security transparency would further enhance their security posture and user trust.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of trackjs.com. View the latest report

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 trackjs.com

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. 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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
68

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention trackjs.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
212
Employees
0
Customers
212
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
22%

2 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for trackjs.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

TrackJS operates in the developer tools market, focusing on JavaScript error monitoring. Their competitive advantage lies in detailed telemetry timelines, intuitive error filtering, and unlimited ignore rules, which help developers quickly identify and resolve frontend errors. The subscription pricing model aligns with customer success by charging based on traffic rather than errors, fostering long-term customer relationships. Their target customers are small to medium businesses and developers who prioritize frontend reliability. The company maintains a partnership ecosystem including Request Metrics and RemoteJS, expanding their toolset offerings. Growth indicators include active customer testimonials from reputable companies and continuous product updates. The company emphasizes transparency and developer empowerment, positioning itself as a reliable alternative to larger error monitoring platforms.

Security posture

TrackJS demonstrates a moderate to high security maturity level. The platform uses HTTPS exclusively, employs token-based authentication for its JavaScript agents, and avoids collecting sensitive user data by default. Privacy compliance with GDPR and CCPA is stated, with masking and exclusion tools for sensitive fields. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No public vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file is available, limiting transparency in incident response. The absence of incident response contact channels is a gap in readiness. Overall, the security culture appears developer-focused and privacy-conscious but could benefit from formalized security frameworks and certifications to enhance trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to strengthen protection against common web attacks.
  3. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting and improve security transparency.
  4. Provide clear incident response contact information, such as a dedicated security@ or abuse@ email address.
  5. Consider pursuing recognized security certifications (e.g., ISO 27001) to demonstrate commitment to security best practices and enhance customer trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
TrackJS LLC
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
TrackJS LLC
Description
TrackJS tracks JavaScript errors from your frontend web applications with all the context you need to understand the impact and fix bugs fast.
Key services
JavaScript error tracking, Telemetry timeline, Error filtering, Ignore rules, Integrations with web frameworks
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React, Angular, Node.js, Next.js, PostHog analytics, Request Metrics, TrackJS agent
Frameworks
React, Angular, Next.js, Express.js
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No sensitive data exposed
  • Use of token-based authentication for scripts
  • Privacy-focused data collection
  • Asynchronous non-blocking scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
PostHog, Request Metrics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
PostHog, Request Metrics
Marketing tools
PostHog, Request Metrics
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 rich content and structured data
  2. Strong focus on developer audience with detailed technical integration guides
  3. Good use of structured data for SEO and trust signals
  4. No visible security headers in HTML but HTTPS is enforced
  5. No cookie consent banner detected despite tracking scripts present
  6. Clear contact email and physical address provided
  7. No phone numbers or contact forms explicitly found
  8. No explicit vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
  9. Multiple external analytics and monitoring scripts used
  10. Pricing and plans clearly presented with free trial option
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern JavaScript frameworks including React, Angular, and Next.js, supported by Node.js backend components. It integrates third-party analytics and monitoring tools such as PostHog and Request Metrics for performance and user behavior insights. The site is well-structured with semantic HTML, optimized for mobile devices, and includes rich structured data (JSON-LD) for SEO and enhanced search presence. The use of asynchronous and non-blocking scripts ensures fast page load times and minimal user impact. However, the hosting provider is not explicitly identified, and no CMS is detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. The technical implementation is robust with opportunities to improve security headers and privacy controls.
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. 67/100Medium31 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with trackjs.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 trackjs.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.