Overview
Findings
Actions
Details
Related
AI-Generated Summary
What this means
polymail.io scored 72/100, meeting baseline requirements but with 3 findings that require attention. The vendor can proceed with a remediation timeline agreement.
Critical gaps in: Security Headers. Positive signals: Known Breaches, DNS Configuration, TLS Configuration all passed.
4 action items identified, including 0 critical. The issues are configuration gaps, not architectural problems. A focused remediation effort of 2–5 days could address all findings.
How polymail.io compares
Grade distribution across 2378 companies we've scanned. polymail.io scores better than 47% of them.
71
A+
22
A
180
A-
181
B+
69
B
333
B-
111
C+
111
C
295
C-
110
D+
92
D
216
D-
587
F
polymail.io — Grade C- (72/100)
2378 companies scanned
Security checks
Each check inspects a different part of polymail.io's public security setup. Green means healthy, yellow needs attention, red is a problem.
Security Headers
Only 1/5 security headers present. Missing: CSP, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy. This exposes the application to clickjacking, MIME-sniffing, and other client-side attacks.
HSTS Header
HSTS present but max-age is low (15552000s). Recommended minimum: 15768000 (6 months).
DMARC / Email Security
Strengths: SPF record present with soft-fail (~all); DKIM configured (selectors: google, k1, mail). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement).
Certificate Hygiene
Strengths: Certificate valid, 80 days remaining; Issued by Let's Encrypt. Issues: Wildcard certificate in use — broader attack surface if compromised.
Known Breaches
No known breaches found in public disclosure databases.
DNS Configuration
Strengths: 2 nameservers configured (evan.ns.cloudflare.com., carol.ns.cloudflare.com.); 5 MX records present; DNSSEC enabled; Zone transfers properly restricted.
TLS Configuration
TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.
CVE Exposure
Detected technologies: cloudflare, Framer/904da2c. (cloudflare detected but excluded from CVE matching — upstream infrastructure). No high or critical CVEs found for detected versions.
Recommended actions
4 items
Steps to improve polymail.io's security grade, ranked by impact.
1
Add missing security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy)
4 of 5 recommended security headers are missing on polymail.io: CSP, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy. These headers protect against clickjacking, MIME-sniffing, and unauthorized browser feature access. Adding them is a server configuration change with no application code changes required.
Compliance impact
PCI-DSS 4.0Req 6.4.1
Security headers are required application controls
OWASPSecure Headers
Recommended baseline for web applications
How to fix this
1
Add Content-Security-Policy header (start with report-only to avoid breakage)
2
Add: X-Frame-Options: DENY (or SAMEORIGIN if you use iframes)
3
Add: Referrer-Policy: strict-origin-when-cross-origin
4
Add: Permissions-Policy: camera=(), microphone=(), geolocation=()
5
Verify with: curl -sI https://polymail.io | grep -iE 'content-security|x-frame|x-content|referrer|permissions'
See all recommendations
Enter your work email to unlock the full action plan.
No spam. We only send security-related updates.
Report unlocked.
2
Strengthen email authentication configuration
Email authentication is partially configured for polymail.io but has gaps. Actions needed: upgrade DMARC policy from 'none' to 'quarantine' or 'reject'. Until DMARC enforcement is active, spoofed emails may still reach recipients.
Compliance impact
NIST CSFPR.AC-7
Email authentication is a required access control
How to fix this
1
Upgrade DMARC policy to p=quarantine (then p=reject after monitoring)
2
Verify with: nslookup -type=txt _dmarc.polymail.io
3
Increase HSTS max-age duration
HSTS is enabled but the max-age (0s) is below the recommended minimum of 15768000s (6 months). A short max-age means browsers forget the HTTPS-only policy quickly, reducing protection between visits.
Compliance impact
PCI-DSS 4.0Req 6.4.1
Application security header configuration
How to fix this
1
Update header: Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload
2
Verify: curl -sI https://polymail.io | grep -i strict
4
Review certificate configuration
Certificate issues found for polymail.io: wildcard certificate in use. Wildcard certificates have a broader blast radius if compromised. These are operational hygiene items, not immediate security risks.
How to fix this
1
Consider replacing wildcard cert with individual certs for critical subdomains
2
Consolidate certificate issuance to 1–2 trusted CAs
At a glance
Key data points from the scan.
TLS Version
TLSv1.3
TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.
DMARC Policy
p=none
Strengths: SPF record present with soft-fail (~all); DKIM configured (selectors: google, k1, mail). Issues: DMARC policy is 'none' (monitoring only, no enforcement).
SPF Record
Present
v=spf1 ip4:34.173.72.104 ip4:209.85.220.41 include:_spf.google.com ~all
Security Headers
1/5 present
Missing: CSP, X-Frame-Options, Referrer-Policy, Permissions-Policy
HSTS
Not enabled
HSTS present but max-age is low (15552000s). Recommended minimum: 15768000 (6 months).
SSL Certificate
Issues
Strengths: Certificate valid, 80 days remaining; Issued by Let's Encrypt. Issues: Wildcard certificate in use — broader attack surface if compromised.
DNSSEC
Enabled
Strengths: 2 nameservers configured (evan.ns.cloudflare.com., carol.ns.cloudflare.com.); 5 MX records present; DNSSEC enabled; Zone transfers properly restricted.