Skip to main content

Security report for acaalternative.com

North American Insurance Services · Healthcare · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 3 other checks.

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ACA Alternatives, operated by North American Insurance Services, is a specialized insurance services provider focusing on alternatives to ACA health insurance plans for Americans under 65. The company positions itself as the largest independent third party Agent Services Administrator in this niche, offering product solutions, sales strategies, and training support to insurance agents and agencies. The website is professionally designed, targeting insurance professionals with clear messaging and relevant content. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using modern frameworks and plugins, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protections, but lacks DNSSEC and security headers, which are recommended for enhanced security. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism detected. Overall, the site is trustworthy and credible, with transparent WHOIS data consistent with the business claims.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  3. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching acaalternative.com

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
60
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
50

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

The business operates in the healthcare insurance sector, specifically targeting the individual market segment under 65 years old. Its business model revolves around supporting insurance agents with alternative products to ACA plans, addressing market disruptions such as subsidy expirations and enrollment changes. The company leverages partnerships and digital marketing tools like Mailchimp and Calendly to engage agents. The market position as a leading independent agent services administrator suggests a competitive advantage in product breadth and training support. The company is relatively new, founded in 2025, and focuses on growth through agent enablement and market adaptation. The partnership ecosystem includes na-insurance.com and design services from 21designs.us.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enforced and domain status flags preventing unauthorized transfers or updates. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security represents areas for improvement. No incident response or security policy pages are present, limiting transparency on security governance. The site collects user data via subscription forms but lacks explicit cookie consent mechanisms, which may pose compliance risks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could benefit from enhanced controls and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve overall DNS security.
  2. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to comply with privacy regulations such as GDPR.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to minimize vulnerability exposure.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
North American Insurance Services
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
North American Insurance Services
Description
North American Insurance Services offers a comprehensive selection of insurance plans as alternatives to ACA for healthy Americans under 65, focusing on individual market products.
Key services
Product solutions, Sales strategies, Training support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Google Fonts, Mailchimp
Frameworks
Genesis Framework, Stackable Ultimate Gutenberg Blocks, Toolset Blocks
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • ClientTransferProhibited and clientUpdateProhibited domain status

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Mailchimp
Marketing tools
Calendly, Mailchimp
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich for its niche.
  2. Clear focus on insurance agents and individual market health insurance alternatives.
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
  4. No explicit privacy or cookie consent mechanisms detected.
  5. WHOIS data is transparent and consistent with business claims.
  6. No advanced security headers detected; DNSSEC not enabled.
  7. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube.
  8. Use of common WordPress plugins and frameworks.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with the Genesis Framework and uses modern Gutenberg blocks and plugins such as Stackable Ultimate Gutenberg Blocks and Toolset Blocks. It incorporates jQuery and Google Fonts for frontend functionality and styling. The site loads external resources from trusted domains including Mailchimp for email marketing and Calendly for scheduling. Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data. Hosting provider details are not explicit but domain registrar is Tucows Domains Inc. The site uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate. There is room for technical improvement in security headers and DNS configuration.
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 acaalternative.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 acaalternative.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.