Skip to main content

Security report for useproof.com

Proof Technologies, Inc. · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Proof Technologies, Inc. is a technology SaaS company specializing in website personalization and social proof marketing to increase online conversions for B2B companies. The company has a solid market position with over 25,000 customers and is recognized as a Y Combinator graduate. Their website is professionally designed, content-rich, and targets businesses seeking to optimize lead generation and sales through personalization tools. Technically, the website leverages modern marketing and analytics technologies such as Segment, Google Tag Manager, and Facebook Pixel, hosted on Cloudflare infrastructure with Webflow CMS. However, the website suffers from critical security shortcomings, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and proper TLS configuration, which severely impacts its security posture. Privacy policies are present but lack a cookie consent mechanism, indicating partial compliance with privacy regulations. The domain registration is consistent and mature, supporting the legitimacy of the business. Overall, the website is functional and credible but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

7 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 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching useproof.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. 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
60

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

Proof operates in the technology sector with a SaaS business model focused on marketing personalization and social proof. Their competitive advantage lies in ease of use and proven conversion uplift, supported by strong customer testimonials and case studies. The company targets medium-sized B2B enterprises and fast-growing startups. Revenue streams likely include subscription fees for their Proof Pulse product and related personalization services. The partnership ecosystem includes PartnerStack for affiliate marketing. The company maintains an active digital presence with educational content, podcasts, and a personalization academy, indicating a growth-oriented strategy. Operationally, the company is based in Austin, Texas, with a mature domain and consistent branding.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing users to potential data interception risks. The absence of HSTS and OCSP stapling further weakens HTTPS security. DNSSEC is not enabled, and CAA records are malformed, indicating DNS security gaps. Email security is partially addressed with SPF and DMARC records, though DMARC policy is set to 'none', limiting its effectiveness. No explicit incident response or security policy information is available, suggesting limited transparency in security governance. The website uses secure form inputs and no known vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture requires significant enhancement to meet industry best practices and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and disable deprecated versions to secure communications.
  3. Configure HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to enforce HTTPS and prevent downgrade attacks.
  4. Correct malformed CAA DNS records and enable DNSSEC to improve DNS security.
  5. Strengthen DMARC policy from 'none' to 'quarantine' or 'reject' to reduce email spoofing.
  6. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  7. Establish and publish a security policy and incident response plan to enhance transparency and preparedness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Proof Technologies, Inc.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Webflow CMS and uses a modern JavaScript stack with integrations for analytics and marketing automation. Hosting and DNS are managed via Cloudflare, providing CDN and DNS services. Performance is slow with a high page size (~2.1MB) and long load time (~24 seconds), indicating optimization opportunities. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO practices are well implemented with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. Technical risks include outdated or missing SSL/TLS configurations and malformed DNS records, which could impact user trust and search engine rankings. Modernization efforts should focus on security hardening and performance optimization.
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 useproof.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 useproof.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.