Feature

Your trust page says compliant. What does the outside say?

Secureless analyses what is externally observable and compares it against what your trust page, privacy policy, and security page claim. The result is a gap analysis that shows where claims and reality do not match.

You claim SOC 2 Type II on your trust page. Your DMARC policy is set to "none." You claim GDPR compliance. Google Analytics fires 1.2 seconds before your cookie consent banner renders. You claim ISO 27001. Your source maps expose 847 application files.

These are not hypotheticals. These are real findings from production scans. The compliance analysis catches the gap between what you say and what is observable.

GDPR

Pre-consent tracking

Every tracking script that fires before your consent banner loads is recorded with timestamps. The scan captures the exact load order, showing which services set cookies and send data before any user interaction.

3 services load before consent:

0.4s google-analytics.com/ga.js

0.6s static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar.js

2.3s cookie consent banner renders

Privacy policy vs observed reality

Your privacy policy lists certain data processors. Your site loads others. If a third-party service is running on your pages but not disclosed in your privacy policy, the scan flags the gap.

Privacy policy lists: Google Analytics, Stripe, Intercom

Observed but not disclosed: HotJar, Segment, Sentry

Cookie consent implementation

Banner present? Reject option available? Does the banner actually block tracking, or does it just look like it does? Which CMP is used (Cookiebot, OneTrust, Osano, etc.)? TCF compliance?

SOC 2

Every security finding is mapped to the relevant Trust Services Criteria. This turns a security report into a SOC 2 gap analysis your auditor can use.

CC6.1

Logical Access

CORS policies, API access controls, session management

CC6.5

Email Protection

SPF, DKIM, DMARC enforcement

CC6.7

Encryption

TLS configuration, HSTS, certificate management

CC7.1

Monitoring

security.txt, bug bounty program, error handling

CC8.1

Change Management

Source maps in production, debug mode, staging exposure

ISO 27001

Findings mapped to Annex A controls, focusing on what is externally verifiable.

A.8.4

Source code access

Source maps, exposed git repos, package manifests

A.8.8

Vulnerability management

Known vulnerable JS libraries detected in production

A.8.20

Network security

Security headers, CORS, TLS configuration

A.8.24

Cryptography

Cipher suites, certificate management, HSTS

A.8.25

Secure development

SRI on external scripts, CSP, secure coding indicators

Claims vs reality

If your trust page says "SOC 2 Type II certified" but your DMARC policy is set to "none" and deprecated TLS versions are still enabled, Secureless documents that gap. It does not say you are non-compliant. It documents the discrepancy between your stated posture and your observable posture.

Compliance discrepancy detected

Claim: SOC 2 Type II (trust page, last updated Jan 2026)

Observable:

DMARC policy: none (CC6.5 gap)

Source maps accessible (CC8.1 gap)

TLS 1.0 still enabled (CC6.7 gap)

3 Trust Services Criteria gaps between claimed compliance and observable posture.

This is not a compliance audit

Secureless does not replace a SOC 2 examination by a CPA firm, an ISO 27001 certification audit, or legal guidance on GDPR. It is a continuous external check that identifies gaps your auditor will also find, before they do. Think of it as preparation, not certification.

See where your claims match reality.

The free scan detects compliance claims. The full assessment checks them against evidence.

Get your free scan

Cookie information

This site uses strictly-necessary cookies for authentication (Clerk) and bot protection (Cloudflare). No tracking, advertising, or analytics cookies are set, so no consent is required. Details in our privacy policy.