Skip to main content

Security report for 17capital.com

17Capital · Finance · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

17Capital is a specialized private credit manager focused on providing NAV finance solutions to private equity investors and management companies globally. Founded in 2008 and headquartered primarily in the UK and US, the firm has established itself as a leading player in the private equity finance sector, offering a range of financing products tailored to portfolio growth and liquidity needs. The website reflects a professional and content-rich digital presence, leveraging WordPress and WP Engine hosting, with strong SEO and structured data implementations to enhance discoverability and user engagement. However, the technical infrastructure shows gaps in SSL certificate validity and HTTPS enforcement, which undermines security posture despite well-configured security headers. The site integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools, including Google Analytics and HubSpot, but lacks a cookie consent mechanism, indicating partial privacy compliance. Contact mechanisms rely on forms and partner emails, with no direct phone or physical address details prominently displayed. Overall, the website demonstrates high business credibility and professionalism but requires urgent remediation of SSL issues and enhanced privacy compliance to improve security and user trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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: Google Analytics, Twitter, LinkedIn, Cloudflare, Google APIs

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

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

Keep watching 17capital.com

This scan found 13 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
50
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
65

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

17Capital operates in the finance sector, specifically targeting private equity investors and management companies with NAV finance products. The company has a medium-sized footprint with a global reach, evidenced by offices in London and New York and a history of over 100 investments. Their business model centers on providing non-dilutive capital solutions that align interests between general partners and limited partners. The firm has received industry recognition, including awards and leadership expansions, signaling growth and market leadership. The website's content strategy includes firm news, insights, ESG commitments, and investor resources, supporting a knowledgeable and engaged audience. Partnerships with media relations firms and a professional design agency further enhance their market positioning. The absence of direct contact phone numbers or physical addresses on the site suggests a controlled communication approach, likely emphasizing secure and managed investor interactions.

Security posture

The website exhibits a moderate security maturity level with several best practices implemented at the HTTP header level, including X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, Content Security Policy, and HSTS headers. However, the critical failure to maintain a valid SSL certificate and enable modern TLS protocols severely impacts the overall security posture, exposing users to potential interception and trust issues. The lack of OCSP stapling and session resumption mechanisms further limits secure and performant HTTPS connections. No explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure information are published, indicating gaps in transparency and readiness. The site does not implement a cookie consent mechanism, which is a compliance and privacy risk under GDPR. Overall, while some security controls are in place, the invalid SSL and missing privacy controls represent significant vulnerabilities that should be prioritized.

Recommendations

  1. Immediately renew and correctly install a valid SSL certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user connections.
  2. Enable TLS 1.2 or higher protocols and configure OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  3. Implement a cookie consent banner and privacy controls to comply with GDPR and enhance user trust.
  4. Publish clear security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure guidelines to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to avoid vulnerabilities and ensure compliance with best practices.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS hosted on WP Engine, utilizing a modern tech stack including jQuery, Vimeo Player, HubSpot forms, and FontAwesome icons. SEO is enhanced through Yoast SEO plugin and structured data (JSON-LD) is well implemented for organization and webpage metadata. Performance metrics are unavailable, but the site includes responsive design elements and mobile optimization appears good. Accessibility features are basic but present. The site relies on multiple external domains for fonts, scripts, and analytics, which is typical but requires monitoring for security and privacy compliance. The invalid SSL certificate is the most critical technical risk, impacting secure communications and user trust. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and professional but requires remediation of SSL and privacy compliance gaps.
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 17capital.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 17capital.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.