Skip to main content

Security report for tractive.com

Tractive · Retail · Finland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Tractive is a leading global provider of GPS and health monitoring trackers for pets, specializing in real-time location tracking and wellness insights for dogs and cats. The company operates a robust e-commerce platform offering subscription-based services that enable worldwide cellular connectivity for their devices. Their market position is strong, supported by extensive customer testimonials, high Trustpilot ratings, and a broad international presence with multi-language support. Technically, the website leverages modern web technologies including nginx, Amazon AWS infrastructure, CloudFront CDN, and advanced JavaScript frameworks. They utilize performance monitoring and A/B testing tools such as New Relic and Visual Website Optimizer, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and accessibility, with good SEO practices. From a security perspective, while the site implements several important security headers and policies, it suffers from a critical issue: the SSL certificate is invalid or missing, and no TLS protocols are enabled. This severely impacts the security posture and user trust. Other security best practices like HSTS and CSP are in place, but the lack of proper HTTPS is a major vulnerability. Overall, the risk assessment highlights the need for immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues to protect user data and maintain trust. Strategic recommendations include fixing the SSL certificate, enabling modern TLS versions, and improving session security. The business credibility is high, but security gaps could undermine customer confidence if not addressed promptly.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching tractive.com

This scan found 12 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
0
Security headers
85
Email security
50
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
15
Average
57

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

Tractive operates in the retail sector, focusing on pet safety technology with a subscription-based revenue model. Their competitive advantage lies in worldwide GPS tracking coverage, health monitoring features, and a strong brand presence. The company targets pet owners globally, offering products compatible with iOS and Android platforms. Growth indicators include a large customer base (over 1 million users), extensive product range, and active marketing channels. Partnerships with cellular providers and payment processors support their global operations. The company maintains a professional online presence with detailed product information, FAQs, and customer reviews, reinforcing trust and market leadership.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with implementation of key security headers such as HSTS, CSP, and X-Frame-Options. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to potential data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. No evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries was found. Compliance with GDPR is indicated by the presence of privacy and cookie policies, but incident response and security policy documentation are lacking or not publicly available. The site would benefit from enhanced incident response readiness and transparent security communication.

Recommendations

  1. Urgently fix the SSL certificate and enable HTTPS with modern TLS protocols (1.2 and 1.3).
  2. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  3. Publish detailed security policies and incident response procedures accessible to users.
  4. Enhance transparency by providing explicit contact channels for security incidents (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure using CloudFront CDN and nginx web server, ensuring scalability and reliability. The tech stack includes modern JavaScript frameworks, server-side templating with Thymeleaf, and integration with analytics and marketing tools like Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, New Relic, and Visual Website Optimizer. Performance is moderate with room for improvement in load times. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with structured data for SEO. Technical risks include the invalid SSL certificate and lack of TLS support, which could impact user trust and search engine ranking.
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 tractive.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 tractive.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.