Skip to main content

Security report for trip.com

Trip.com Travel Singapore Pte. Ltd. · Transportation · Singapore

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Trip.com Travel Singapore Pte. Ltd. operates the Trip.com website, a major global online travel agency offering hotel, flight, train, car rental, and tour booking services. The platform targets a broad international audience with multi-language and multi-currency support, positioning itself as a comprehensive one-stop travel partner. The website features extensive content, including travel guides, deals, and customer support, reflecting a mature and well-established business model under the Trip.com Group umbrella. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript frameworks and modular design, optimized for performance and mobile devices, with progressive web app capabilities enhancing user experience. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and secure payment claims, though explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are not clearly visible. The absence of WHOIS data reduces transparency but does not detract significantly from the site's legitimacy given its professional presentation and trust indicators. Overall, Trip.com demonstrates a strong digital presence with good security and privacy compliance, suitable for its large-scale travel service operations.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

4 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 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

  3. 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 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 trip.com

This scan found 15 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
80
Security headers
55
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
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

Trip.com holds a strong market position as a large online travel agency with a diverse service portfolio including accommodations, flights, trains, car rentals, and tours. Its business model relies on commission-based bookings and partnerships with global travel providers. The company targets global travelers seeking convenience and competitive pricing, supported by a loyalty rewards program and extensive travel content. Partnerships with Google and TripAdvisor enhance its ecosystem and credibility. The platform's multi-regional presence and localized content indicate strategic global expansion. Revenue streams likely include booking fees, advertising, and affiliate programs. The company maintains a professional brand image with awards and customer service accolades, supporting sustained growth and competitive advantage in the travel industry.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS encryption and secure payment claims, indicating adherence to industry standards for protecting user data. However, the lack of visible security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement in defense-in-depth strategies. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a cookie consent banner may pose compliance risks under privacy regulations. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available, which could impact transparency and user trust. Overall, the security measures are adequate for business operations but could be enhanced by implementing additional HTTP headers and publishing security governance documents.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to strengthen protection against common web attacks.
  2. Deploy a visible cookie consent mechanism to ensure compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan to improve transparency and user confidence.
  4. Enhance WHOIS transparency by ensuring domain registration details are publicly available or justified if privacy protection is used.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking technologies to minimize privacy risks and optimize performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Trip.com Travel Singapore Pte. Ltd.
Description
Choose from over 1.2 million hotels in more than 200 countries, 30 million real guest reviews. Book flights to over 5,000 destinations worldwide. 24/7 Customer Service.
Key services
Hotel bookings, Flight bookings, Train bookings, Car rentals, Attractions and tours, Travel guides, Travel deals and promotions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React (implied by webpack and modular JS), Polyfill.js, Google Tag Manager, Various Trip.com proprietary JS modules
Frameworks
Webpack, Custom Trip.com UI framework
Platforms
Web (desktop and mobile optimized), PWA enabled
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure payment claims
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Yandex Metrica, TikTok Analytics, Naver Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
TikTok Analytics, Yandex Metrica, Naver Analytics, DoubleClick
Transparency
good

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 no blocking detected
  2. Strong global travel service platform with multi-language and multi-currency support
  3. Extensive use of modern JavaScript frameworks and modular architecture
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in HTML; contact via support pages
  5. Privacy and terms pages are present and comprehensive
  6. No explicit cookie consent banner detected
  7. Social media presence is strong with official Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube links
  8. Security headers not explicitly visible in HTML content; SSL is enforced
  9. No signs of adult or questionable content
  10. WHOIS data missing, reducing transparency but not necessarily indicating fraud
Technical notes

Notes

Trip.com utilizes a modern, modular JavaScript-based tech stack with evidence of React or similar frameworks, supported by webpack bundling and polyfills for compatibility. The site is optimized for fast loading and mobile responsiveness, including PWA features for enhanced user experience. SEO is well addressed with comprehensive meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data for rich search results. Accessibility features such as ARIA roles and keyboard navigation hints are present, indicating attention to inclusive design. Hosting details are not explicitly disclosed, but the use of multiple tripcdn.com subdomains suggests a content delivery network for global performance. The technical infrastructure supports a scalable and robust platform suitable for high traffic and complex booking workflows.
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 trip.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 trip.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.