Skip to main content

Security report for wpbeaverbuilder.com

Beaver Builder · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Beaver Builder is a well-established WordPress page builder plugin provider, offering drag-and-drop website building tools, themes, templates, and integrations. The company targets a broad audience including freelancers, agencies, entrepreneurs, and WordPress professionals. Their market position is strong with over 1 million sites using their products since 2014. The website demonstrates a mature digital presence with professional design, clear navigation, and extensive content including testimonials and community support. Technically, the site runs on WordPress with WooCommerce and uses modern libraries and frameworks such as Bootstrap, jQuery, and Font Awesome. It integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools with consent mechanisms, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and use of hCaptcha on forms, though explicit security policies and headers could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable anomaly but does not detract significantly from the overall legitimacy based on website content. Privacy compliance is basic with cookie consent but lacks a clearly accessible privacy policy page. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-optimized for SEO and mobile devices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  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 wpbeaverbuilder.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
65
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
71

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

Beaver Builder operates a SaaS and licensing business model focused on WordPress site building tools. Their revenue streams likely include subscription plans, add-ons, and professional services such as web design and maintenance. The company leverages a strong community and educational resources to support customer retention and growth. Partnerships include integrations with popular platforms and affiliate marketing programs. The business targets multiple customer segments from individual freelancers to agencies and enterprises. The website content and marketing emphasize ease of use, flexibility, and developer friendliness, positioning Beaver Builder as a reliable and scalable solution in the competitive WordPress builder market.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with HTTPS enabled and use of hCaptcha to protect forms from abuse. Tracking and marketing pixels are deployed with cookie consent, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. However, the site lacks explicit security policies, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Security headers are not explicitly visible in the provided data, suggesting room for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be enhanced by publishing clear security documentation and implementing comprehensive HTTP security headers.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy page clearly linked in the footer or main navigation.
  2. Implement and verify HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Provide a publicly accessible security policy and incident response contact information.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Consider publishing company contact emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility and customer trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Beaver Builder
Description
Easily build beautiful, responsive WordPress pages in minutes. Beaver Builder is a drag and drop WordPress Page Builder.
Key services
WordPress Page Builder Plugin, Beaver Builder Theme, Beaver Themer, Templates, Add-ons and Integrations, Web Design Services, WordPress Maintenance, Web Development
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.3, WooCommerce 9.8.2, Gravity Forms, jQuery, Bootstrap, Font Awesome 5.15.4, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Reddit Pixel, Cookiebot, hCaptcha
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of hCaptcha on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security/tracking pixels with consent
  • No deprecated or vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Reddit Pixel
Marketing tools
Cookiebot, Gravity Forms
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. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual for a commercial domain
  3. Strong branding and professional design consistent with a mature WordPress plugin business
  4. Multiple marketing and tracking technologies used with consent mechanisms
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed, only contact forms
  6. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected in provided content
  7. Security best practices partially implemented but could be improved with explicit policies
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform with WooCommerce and Gravity Forms, leveraging Bootstrap for responsive design and Font Awesome for icons. It uses Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Reddit Pixel, and Cookiebot for analytics, marketing, and consent management. The site loads multiple optimized images and fonts with preloading strategies, indicating attention to performance. Accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA roles are present. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive layouts and good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. No deprecated or vulnerable libraries were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit, but the site appears stable and performant with moderate loading speed.
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. 68/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with wpbeaverbuilder.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 wpbeaverbuilder.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.