Skip to main content

Security report for twoboxes.com

Two Boxes · E-commerce · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Two Boxes is a specialized B2B SaaS provider offering returns processing software tailored for brands and third-party logistics providers (3PLs). Their platform focuses on optimizing and making ecommerce returns sustainable by capturing critical data throughout the returns process, regardless of SKU complexity or standard operating procedures. The company positions itself as a forward-looking solution in the ecommerce returns space, targeting businesses seeking efficiency and sustainability in reverse logistics. Technically, the website is built using Framer, a modern design and development platform, and integrates several analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight, and Plausible Analytics. The site implements a cookie consent mechanism via OneTrust, indicating some level of privacy compliance. Performance and mobile optimization are good, though accessibility features are basic. The site uses HTTPS, ensuring secure communication. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and explicit privacy or terms of service pages, which are important for compliance and trust. No contact information or incident response contacts are provided, limiting transparency. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy and trustworthiness, although the website content and design appear professional. Overall, the risk is moderate due to missing WHOIS data and privacy documentation. Strategic improvements in transparency, security headers, and compliance documentation would enhance trust and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

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 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 twoboxes.com

This scan found 21 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
57
Security headers
40
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
73

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

Two Boxes operates in the ecommerce sector, focusing on returns management software for brands and 3PLs. Their business model is B2B SaaS, providing software solutions that streamline returns processing and data capture. The company targets ecommerce brands and logistics providers, a niche with growing demand due to increasing ecommerce volumes and sustainability concerns. The website's professional design and integration of modern marketing tools suggest a digitally mature organization. However, the absence of detailed company information, contact details, and WHOIS data limits full business intelligence insights. There is no evidence of parent or subsidiary relationships. The company appears to be a small-sized entity with a focused market approach.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a fundamental security requirement. It employs a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR principles, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options is a notable gap that could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The lack of explicit privacy policy, terms of service, and incident response contacts reduces transparency and compliance maturity. The missing WHOIS data is a concern for domain legitimacy and trust. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing recommended security headers, publishing compliance documents, and providing clear contact channels for security incidents.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  3. Add clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers, and establish a dedicated security incident response contact.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure transparency and legitimacy.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability scans to maintain a strong security posture and compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Two Boxes
Description
Two Boxes provides returns processing software that optimizes and makes ecommerce returns sustainable. It powers the processing of returns and captures critical data from the returns process regardless of SKU count or SOP.
Key services
Returns processing software, Data capture from returns, Support for complex SKU counts and SOPs
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, OneTrust Cookie Consent, Plausible Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Framer (site generator)
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Plausible Analytics, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
LinkedIn Insight, Plausible Analytics
Marketing tools
LinkedIn Insight
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges.
  2. No WHOIS data available, indicating possible recent domain registration or privacy protection.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with OneTrust.
  5. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found on the site.
  6. Site uses modern analytics and marketing tools including Google Analytics, LinkedIn Insight, and Plausible.
  7. Site built with Framer, indicating a modern design approach.
  8. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL is enabled.
  9. Content is business-focused on ecommerce returns software for brands and 3PLs.
  10. No adult or questionable content detected; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Framer platform, leveraging modern web technologies and integrating multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight, and Plausible Analytics. The site uses HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communication. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. However, the absence of security headers and lack of detailed company and compliance information indicate areas for technical improvement. The site does not expose sensitive data or show signs of vulnerabilities in the analyzed content. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified from the data.
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 twoboxes.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 twoboxes.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.