Is cataas.com safe to use as a vendor?

cataas.com scored 62/100 on LynxRadar's security posture assessment. The domain partially meets security requirements with some gaps to address. 8 checks passed, 4 warnings, 3 critical issues across 16 passive checks including TLS, DMARC, security headers, breaches, and CVEs.

What TLS version does cataas.com use?

cataas.com uses TLSv1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256. TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.

Does cataas.com have SPF configured?

Yes. SPF record: v=spf1 include:_spf-eu.ionos.com ~all

Does cataas.com have security headers configured?

cataas.com has 0 of 5 recommended security headers. Missing: CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy.

Has cataas.com been involved in a data breach?

No known breaches found. No known breaches found in public disclosure databases.

Does cataas.com have known CVE vulnerabilities?

No server software versions detected in HTTP response headers. This is good practice (version hiding) but means CVE exposure cannot be assessed from external signals alone.

Is cataas.com's SSL certificate valid?

Yes. Strengths: Certificate valid, 73 days remaining; Issued by Let's Encrypt.

cataas.com Security Report — Grade D- (62/100)

Q: Does cataas.com have DMARC configured?

Yes. cataas.com's DMARC policy is set to 'none'. SPF record: yes. Strengths: DMARC pct=100 — policy applies to all mail; SPF soft-fail (~all) configured; SPF DNS lookup count: 1/10 (within limit). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); DMARC has no aggregate report URI (rua) — policy violations won't be reported; No DKIM records found for common selectors (domain may use custom selectors — this is not a confirmed gap).

Q: Does cataas.com use HSTS?

No. Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks. If this domain is in the browser HSTS preload list, browsers may still enforce HTTPS — but the header should be present for full coverage.

Q: Does cataas.com have DNSSEC enabled?

No. Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns1023.ui-dns.org, ns1023.ui-dns.de, ns1023.ui-dns.biz, ns1023.ui-dns.com); NS records span 4 providers (ui-dns.org, ui-dns.de, ui-dns.biz, ui-dns.com) — genuine redundancy; SOA record present and MNAME consistent with NS set; 2 MX record(s) present; Zone transfers properly restricted on all nameservers; Address records present: 1 A record(s). Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed or tampered with in transit (DNS cache poisoning).

D-

Conditional · 62/100

Shows significant security gaps that need urgent attention. Positive signals: TLS Configuration, Cookie Security, and TLS Protocol Support all passed. 7 action items identified, including 1 critical. The issues point to real architectural gaps, not just configuration tweaks. A focused remediation effort of 2–5 days could address all findings.

Trust Score Trend

→ No change 1 scan · Last scanned July 08, 2026

Score

100 75 50 25 0

D-

cataas.com

62/100

Compliance & Certifications

Not yet verified

SOC 2 Type II

Audit report not on file

3rd party · AICPA

Pro subscribers only

ISO 27001

Certificate not on file

3rd party · accredited body

Pro subscribers only

GDPR

DPA not on file

Self-reported

Pro subscribers only

CCPA

Self-reported

Pro subscribers only

Incident History

None in 12 months

March 2026

ChatGPT data exposure

1 source

Resolved

Pro subscribers only

April 2023 – Feb 2026

ChatGPT data exposure

1 source

Resolved

Pro subscribers only

Security Posture

7 items need attention

8 passed

0 of 1 fixed

All 1 critical issue marked as fixed

Re-scan to confirm and update your score.

Turn on email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC)

DMARC / Email Security

1–2 days

This exposes customers, partners, and employees to phishing attacks that impersonate your brand. Right now, anyone can send an email that looks like it came from [email protected] — no password or hack required. This is how the vast majority of phishing scams that impersonate a company work, and it can damage your reputation with customers even though your systems were never touched. Missing: DKIM.

NIST CSFPR.AC-7

Email authentication is a required access control

ISO 27001A.13.2.1

Information transfer policies require email security controls

HIPAA§164.312(e)

Transmission security for electronic PHI

How to fix this

1Turn on DKIM signing — look for "DKIM" under your email provider's admin/security settings. It will generate a record for you to paste into the same DNS settings above.

2After 2–4 weeks, check the DMARC reports for anything legitimate that got flagged, then tighten the policy from quarantine to reject.

Email authentication guide

Report unlocked.

View all 8 passed checks

TLS Configuration

Cookie Security

TLS Protocol Support

Known Breaches

CVE Exposure

Certificate Hygiene

MX Records & Mail Provider

Subprocessors & Tech Stack

Company Signals

Claim profile →

Operational risk

Low

11 yrs operating. Well-funded

Lynxradar · Composite signal

Last funding

$40B

Series F · Mar 2025 · SoftBank-led

Crunchbase ↗

Employees

~3,000

+40% YoY growth

LinkedIn ↗

Trust Resources

Claim profile →

Trust Center

trust.cataas.com ↗

Security page

cataas.com/security ↗

cataas.com/privacy ↗

DPA (Data Processing Agreement)

cataas.com/dpa ↗

Updated recently

Subprocessors List

cataas.com/policies/subprocessors ↗

Similar companies

Appears in

Claim profile →

SOC 2 Type II certified vendors

847 companies · Updated weekly by LynxRadar

Track

ISO 27001 certified SaaS

312 companies · Updated weekly by LynxRadar

Track

Top AI vendors by trust score

94 companies · LynxRadar ranking

Track

Enterprise-ready SaaS · Trust score A or above

203 companies · LynxRadar ranking

Track

Blocking Issues

Not enabled

Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks. If this domain is in the browser HSTS preload list, browsers may still enforce HTTPS — but the header should be present for full coverage.

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★★☆

0/5 present

Missing: CSP, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

p=none

Strengths: DMARC pct=100 — policy applies to all mail; SPF soft-fail (~all) configured; SPF DNS lookup count: 1/10 (within limit). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement); DMARC has no aggregate report URI (rua) — policy violations won't be reported; No DKIM records found for common selectors (domain may use custom selectors — this is not a confirmed gap).

Likelihood: ★★★★★

Impact: ★★★★☆

Medium Priority

Warn

Issues: No MTA-STS configured — email in transit is vulnerable to TLS downgrade attacks; sending servers cannot verify your mail server requires TLS; No TLSRPT record (_smtp._tls) — TLS delivery failures won't be reported to the domain owner.

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Not enabled

Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns1023.ui-dns.org, ns1023.ui-dns.de, ns1023.ui-dns.biz, ns1023.ui-dns.com); NS records span 4 providers (ui-dns.org, ui-dns.de, ui-dns.biz, ui-dns.com) — genuine redundancy; SOA record present and MNAME consistent with NS set; 2 MX record(s) present; Zone transfers properly restricted on all nameservers; Address records present: 1 A record(s). Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed or tampered with in transit (DNS cache poisoning).

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Best Practice

Warn

No CAA records found in the DNS tree for this domain. Without CAA, any Certificate Authority can issue certificates for this domain. Adding CAA records restricts issuance to authorised CAs only, reducing the risk of misissued certificates.

Likelihood: ★☆☆☆☆

Impact: ★☆☆☆☆

Warn

No security.txt found. Publishing a security.txt at /.well-known/security.txt is the industry standard (RFC 9116) for vulnerability disclosure policies. Its absence may indicate a less mature security program.

Likelihood: ★☆☆☆☆

Impact: ★☆☆☆☆