Is superapp.id safe to use as a vendor?

superapp.id scored 57/100 on LynxRadar's security posture assessment. The domain has significant security gaps that should be addressed. 5 checks passed, 2 warnings, 3 critical issues across 10 passive checks including TLS, DMARC, security headers, breaches, and CVEs.

What TLS version does superapp.id use?

superapp.id uses TLSv1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384. TLSv1.3 negotiated with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256-bit). Strong configuration with no deprecated protocols or weak ciphers detected.

Does superapp.id have SPF configured?

Yes. SPF record: v=spf1 include:amazonses.com ~all

Does superapp.id have security headers configured?

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

Has superapp.id been involved in a data breach?

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

Is superapp.id's SSL certificate valid?

Yes. Strengths: Certificate valid, 80 days remaining; Issued by Let's Encrypt.

superapp.id Security Report — Grade F (57/100)

Q: Does superapp.id have DMARC configured?

No. superapp.id's DMARC policy is set to 'none'. SPF record: yes. Strengths: SPF soft-fail (~all) configured; SPF DNS lookup count: 1/10 (within limit). Issues: No DMARC record found — email spoofing is not prevented. Note: DKIM couldn't be confirmed from outside (custom selector names can't be looked up, and some DNS hosts don't expose them), so it isn't counted against the score.

Q: Does superapp.id use HSTS?

No. Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks.

Q: Does superapp.id have DNSSEC enabled?

No. Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1724.awsdns-23.co.uk., ns-433.awsdns-54.com., ns-831.awsdns-39.net., ns-1523.awsdns-62.org.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.

Trust rating

Fail · 57/100

Procurement snapshot

1 critical finding identified — these point to architectural gaps, not just configuration tweaks.

Strengths

Known Breaches

TLS Configuration

MX Records & Mail Provider

Certificate Hygiene

Questions to ask

Confirm email authentication (SPF/DKIM/DMARC) rollout plans

Estimated remediation effort: 2–6 days

Based on a passive external scan — supplement with vendor-provided attestations, not a replacement.

Trust Score Trend

→ No change 1 scan · Last scanned February 18, 2026

Your rating Industry average

Score

100 75 50 25 0

superapp.id

57/100

Compliance & Certifications

Not yet verified

PCI-DSS

AOC not on file

3rd party · QSA

CCPA

Self-reported

GDPR

DPA not on file

Self-reported

Incident History

No public breaches on record

Security Posture

5 items need attention

5 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 Critical

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: DMARC.

NIST SP 800-177r1§4

Trustworthy Email recommends SPF, DKIM and DMARC for every email domain

ISO 27001:2022A.5.14

Information transfer controls cover email

CISA BOD 18-01DMARC

Requires DMARC p=reject on US federal email domains

How to fix this

1If DKIM signing isn't on yet (we can't confirm it from outside): Turn on DKIM signing in Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim for the exact steps. It gives you a record to add in your DNS settings (you're using Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim).

v=DMARC1; p=quarantine; rua=mailto:[email protected]

2Add a DMARC record in your DNS settings (you're using Google Workspace — see https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/set-up-dkim). This tells receiving mail servers what to do with messages that fail SPF and DKIM checks (start on "quarantine" — send to spam — rather than "reject", so nothing legitimate gets blocked while you're testing).

3After 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 5 passed checks

Known Breaches

TLS Configuration

MX Records & Mail Provider

Certificate Hygiene

Subprocessors & Tech Stack

Company Signals

Operational risk

Last funding

Employees

Trust Resources

Claim profile →

Trust Center

Not detected

DPA (Data Processing Agreement)

Subprocessors List

Tech Stack Detected

Subprocessors

Amazon CloudFront

Similar companies in B2C E-commerce / Retail

Appears in

B2C E-commerce / Retail vendors

248 companies scanned by LynxRadar

Vendors graded F

169 companies · LynxRadar ranking

Blocking Issues

Not configured

Strengths: SPF soft-fail (~all) configured; SPF DNS lookup count: 1/10 (within limit). Issues: No DMARC record found — email spoofing is not prevented. Note: DKIM couldn't be confirmed from outside (custom selector names can't be looked up, and some DNS hosts don't expose them), so it isn't counted against the score.

Likelihood: ★★★★★

Impact: ★★★★☆

Not enabled

Strict-Transport-Security header is missing. Connections can be downgraded to HTTP via man-in-the-middle attacks.

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★★☆

0/5 present

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

Likelihood: ★★★☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Medium Priority

Not enabled

Strengths: 4 nameservers configured (ns-1724.awsdns-23.co.uk., ns-433.awsdns-54.com., ns-831.awsdns-39.net., ns-1523.awsdns-62.org.); 5 MX records present; Zone transfers properly restricted. Issues: DNSSEC not configured — DNS responses can be spoofed.

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆

Warnings

Detected technologies: Apache/2.4.41. 1 high-severity CVE(s) found (CVSS 7.0–8.9): CVE-2020-13950. Patching recommended.

Likelihood: ★★☆☆☆

Impact: ★★★☆☆