Skip to main content

Security report for yoco.com

Yoco · Finance · South Africa

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Yoco is a South African fintech company specializing in payment solutions for small and medium businesses. It offers card machines, integrated POS systems, and business tools to over 200,000 merchants, positioning itself as a leading payment provider in the region. The website reflects a mature digital presence with a modern tech stack based on React and Gatsby, ensuring fast performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is strong with HTTPS, security headers, and PCI DSS compliance, although explicit security policies and incident response details are not publicly available. The absence of WHOIS registrant data slightly reduces transparency but does not detract from the overall legitimacy of the business. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security transparency and publishing vulnerability disclosure information.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

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 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 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

    • 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching yoco.com

This scan found 20 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
50
Email security
85
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
70

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

Yoco operates in the finance and technology sectors, targeting South African merchants needing payment processing and POS solutions. Its business model revolves around hardware sales (card machines) and transaction processing fees. The company enjoys a strong market position with a large merchant base and partnerships with major payment processors like Stripe and PayPal. Growth indicators include extensive customer support and a 30-day money-back guarantee, enhancing customer trust. The website's professional design and comprehensive content support its credibility and market presence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security maturity level with enforced HTTPS, multiple security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. However, the lack of published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure programs indicates room for improvement in transparency and readiness. Compliance with GDPR is indicated through privacy policies, but explicit data protection officer contact details are missing. Overall, the security posture is solid but could benefit from enhanced communication of security practices.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure or bug bounty program.
  3. Provide clear contact information for a Data Protection Officer or security team.
  4. Regularly audit and update WHOIS information to improve transparency.
  5. Enhance user trust by showcasing certifications and compliance badges prominently.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Yoco
Description
Yoco provides card machines and business payment solutions to over 200,000 South African merchants, offering low rates, easy-to-use business tools, and 7-day support.
Key services
Card machines, Integrated POS systems, Payment processing, Business tools, Customer support
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Gatsby, Swiper.js
Frameworks
Gatsby
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with CSRF protection likely

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
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 professional design
  2. Strong focus on South African market and payment solutions
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  4. WHOIS data is missing or privacy protected, which is common but reduces transparency
  5. Good security posture with HTTPS and security headers
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and comprehensive
  7. Contact information is available with multiple channels
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern React-based framework (Gatsby) optimized for performance and SEO. The tech stack includes Swiper.js for UI components and integrates analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good use of meta tags and structured data. Hosting details are not explicit but the performance and security headers suggest a reputable hosting provider. Technical risks are minimal, with no outdated or vulnerable libraries detected in the provided content.
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 yoco.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 yoco.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.