Skip to main content

Security report for userback.io

Domains By Proxy, LLC · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Userback.io is a SaaS company specializing in user feedback software, offering visual feedback tools and integrations primarily targeting SaaS companies and WordPress users. The company is positioned as a leading provider in its niche with a business model based on subscription services. The website is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and uses modern marketing and analytics technologies such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Intercom, and LinkedIn Insight. Hosting is on AWS, indicating a robust infrastructure. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enabled and cookie consent mechanisms implemented; however, the absence of explicit privacy policies, terms of service, and security headers indicates room for improvement in compliance and security transparency. No WAF or blocking mechanisms were detected, allowing full content access for analysis.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of userback.io. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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

8 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 userback.io

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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
64

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

Userback operates in the technology sector, focusing on user feedback solutions for SaaS and WordPress platforms. The company leverages integrations and visual feedback tools to differentiate itself in a competitive market. The domain age and hosting infrastructure support a medium-sized, established business. The use of privacy protection in WHOIS is justified and common for SaaS companies. The lack of explicit contact information and legal documents on the site may impact user trust and compliance perception. Marketing efforts include multiple tracking and retargeting services, indicating a mature digital marketing strategy.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent implemented. However, the lack of security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The absence of a published security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure program suggests limited transparency in security governance. Enhancing these areas would improve compliance with GDPR and other regulations and strengthen incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident contacts and general support channels.
  4. Establish and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and ensure GDPR compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Domains By Proxy, LLC
Description
Userback provides user feedback software solutions, including visual feedback tools and integrations for SaaS products and WordPress plugins.
Key services
User feedback collection, Visual feedback tools, Integrations with SaaS and WordPress
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Intercom, LinkedIn Insight Tag, WordPress (implied by URLs), Truendo Cookie Control
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • Use of client-side consent management

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Intercom, Microsoft Clarity, LinkedIn Insight
Marketing tools
Intercom, Truendo Cookie Control
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses modern tracking and marketing technologies
  2. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with granular consent categories
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found in provided content
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in HTML content
  5. Domain uses privacy protection service, which is common and justified
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information detected
  7. Website content is professional and targeted at SaaS and WordPress users
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress and uses a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, and Intercom for analytics and customer engagement. Hosting is provided via AWS DNS services, indicating reliable infrastructure. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. The site uses a cookie consent management platform (Truendo) to handle user consent for various cookie categories. There is an opportunity to improve technical SEO and accessibility further by adding missing meta tags and ARIA attributes. The absence of DNSSEC is a minor risk that should be addressed to improve DNS security.
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. 73/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with userback.io. 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 userback.io.

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.