Skip to main content

Security report for userscape.com

UserScape, Inc. · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

UserScape, Inc. is a small technology company founded in 2005 that specializes in developing software products such as HelpSpot (help desk software), LaraJobs (Laravel job board), and Thermostat (NPS survey software). They are deeply embedded in the Laravel PHP community, organizing official conferences and job boards, positioning themselves as a niche player with a strong community focus. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand with good content quality and clear navigation, targeting businesses and developers within the Laravel ecosystem. Technically, the website uses modern frontend technologies including Tailwind CSS and ES modules, hosted behind Cloudflare. However, the site suffers from a lack of a valid SSL certificate and does not support HTTPS, which is a critical security flaw. Performance is moderate, and mobile optimization is good, but accessibility and SEO optimizations are basic. No CMS or advanced analytics tools were detected. From a security perspective, while email security is well configured with SPF and DMARC policies, the absence of HTTPS, security headers, and other best practices significantly lowers the security posture. No incident response or security policy information is available, and no cookie or privacy consent mechanisms are implemented, indicating gaps in privacy compliance. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires urgent improvements in security infrastructure and privacy compliance to enhance trustworthiness and protect user data.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

    • 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 userscape.com

This scan found 17 issues across 5 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
100
Security headers
50
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
76

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

UserScape operates in the technology sector with a focus on software products and community engagement around the Laravel PHP framework. Their business model combines product sales with community-driven events and services, creating multiple revenue streams. The company targets developers and businesses needing help desk solutions and Laravel-related services. Their market position is that of a specialized niche provider with strong community ties, which is a competitive advantage. Partnerships with Laravel and related domains reinforce their ecosystem presence. Growth indicators include sustained product offerings and event management. However, the lack of visible certifications or extensive contact information may limit broader enterprise trust.

Security posture

The current security posture of UserScape's website is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which is a critical vulnerability. While DNS-based email security measures like SPF and DMARC are properly configured, the lack of HTTP security headers, HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption mechanisms exposes the site to potential risks. No formal security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure programs are published, indicating limited security governance. The site does not implement cookie consent or privacy compliance features, which may pose regulatory risks. Overall, the security maturity is low and requires immediate remediation to protect user data and maintain trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site immediately.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Enable HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload directives to enforce secure connections.
  4. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve GDPR compliance.
  5. Create and publish a security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and readiness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with modern frontend technologies such as Tailwind CSS and ES modules, indicating a contemporary development approach. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare, providing DNS and CDN services. Performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4 seconds and a small page size. The site lacks advanced SEO meta tags and structured data, limiting search engine optimization. Accessibility features are basic, and no CMS or analytics platforms were detected. The absence of HTTPS and security headers represents a significant technical risk. Overall, the infrastructure is modern but requires security and compliance enhancements to reduce technical debt and operational risks.
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 userscape.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 userscape.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.