Skip to main content

Security report for xing.com

XING · Technology · Germany

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

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

XING is a leading professional networking and job marketplace platform primarily serving the German-speaking market. It offers over one million job listings, access to thousands of recruiters, and employer reviews, positioning itself as a comprehensive career and recruitment solution. The platform is owned by New Work SE and targets job seekers, recruiters, and companies. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React, GraphQL, and AWS hosting, with a responsive and accessible design. However, the security posture is weakened by an invalid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS protocol support, which poses risks to user data confidentiality and trust. Privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, but no explicit cookie consent mechanism was detected. Overall, the site is professional and content-rich but requires urgent security improvements to ensure safe user interactions.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of xing.com. View the latest report

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 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 xing.com

This scan found 13 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
55
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
72

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention xing.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
207,799
Employees
12
Customers
207,705
Third parties
82
Weak passwords
13%

Latest record dated 2026-06-09 · 109 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for xing.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –login.xing.com2026-06-09
  • –xing.com2026-01-12
  • –xing.com2026-01-12
  • –login.xing.com2025-11-13
  • –www.xing.com2025-08-08

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

XING operates in the technology sector as a professional network and job platform, generating revenue through premium memberships and recruiting services. It holds a strong market position in German-speaking countries, supported by its parent company New Work SE. The platform integrates with partners like kununu for employer reviews and offers extensive job listings and recruiter profiles. Its business model focuses on connecting professionals with job opportunities and providing tools for career development. The presence of large enterprise clients and recruiters indicates a mature ecosystem. Growth potential lies in expanding digital services and enhancing user engagement through AI-driven job matching.

Security posture

The website demonstrates good security practices in HTTP headers, including HSTS and XSS protection. However, the invalid SSL certificate and absence of TLS protocol support are critical vulnerabilities that undermine secure communications. The lack of OCSP stapling and session resumption further reduces security efficiency. No explicit incident response or security policy pages were found, indicating potential gaps in transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is strong with a detailed privacy policy, but cookie consent mechanisms are missing. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues to protect user data and maintain trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user data.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) to enhance encryption.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  4. Add a clear cookie consent banner to comply with privacy regulations and enhance transparency.
  5. Publish explicit security and incident response policies to improve user trust and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern React-based frontend with GraphQL APIs, hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure. It employs CSS-in-JS for styling and SVG graphics for logos and icons. Performance is moderate with preloading of scripts and fonts, and mobile optimization is excellent. Accessibility features such as skip navigation links and ARIA roles are present. SEO is supported by meta tags, Open Graph data, and JSON-LD structured data. However, the SSL/TLS configuration is outdated and insecure, which is a significant technical risk. The site lacks visible CMS indicators, suggesting a custom or proprietary solution.
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. 73/100Medium26 findingsView report
  2. 73/100 +2Medium26 findingsView report
  3. 71/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with xing.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 xing.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.