Skip to main content

Security report for acropoliswarehousing.ca

Acropolis Warehousing Inc. · Transportation · Canada

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Acropolis Warehousing Inc. is a medium-sized Canadian company specializing in third-party logistics and warehousing services primarily across Western Canada. Founded in 1993 as an independent arm of Rosenau Transport Ltd., it offers integrated supply chain solutions including warehousing, order fulfillment, and direct distribution. The company positions itself as a premier warehouse provider with a focus on customer service and operational excellence. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Bootstrap and jQuery, incorporating modern marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics and Microsoft Clarity. However, the site suffers from critical security shortcomings, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS, which severely impacts its security posture. Privacy compliance is basic, with privacy and terms pages present but lacking cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the site demonstrates moderate digital maturity but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching acropoliswarehousing.ca

This scan found 21 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
90
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
68

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 company operates in the transportation sector with a focus on warehousing and logistics services. Its business model revolves around providing third-party logistics solutions to businesses in Western Canada, leveraging the resources and legacy of its parent company, Rosenau Transport Ltd. The website content and structure indicate a professional approach with clear service offerings and a target audience of businesses needing supply chain management. The partnership with GLS Group Canada suggests a broader logistics network. The company maintains accreditation and emphasizes customer service and environmental responsibility. Growth indicators include a well-structured website and marketing automation tools, though the lack of visible contact emails and social media presence may limit outreach. The company could benefit from enhanced digital engagement and stronger security and privacy practices to improve market competitiveness.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No security headers are configured, and critical email authentication protocols like DMARC are missing, increasing susceptibility to phishing and spoofing attacks. While SPF is correctly configured, the absence of DMARC and DKIM reduces email security effectiveness. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The use of multiple third-party tracking and marketing scripts without a cookie consent mechanism raises privacy compliance concerns. Immediate remediation is required to install SSL/TLS, enable HTTPS, configure security headers, and implement privacy controls to mitigate risks and align with best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a DMARC DNS record to complement the existing SPF record for improved email security.
  4. Deploy a cookie consent banner to comply with privacy regulations and inform users about tracking.
  5. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Acropolis Warehousing Inc.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 using a custom theme 'rosenau' and leverages Bootstrap for responsive design and jQuery for client-side scripting. It integrates marketing and analytics tools including Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, and a marketing automation service. The hosting IP (151.101.2.159) suggests delivery via Fastly CDN. Performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4.3 seconds and a page size of about 527 KB. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for WebSite schema. Accessibility features are basic, and no forms are detected on the homepage. The absence of HTTPS and security headers represents a significant technical risk. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but requires security hardening and performance optimization.
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 acropoliswarehousing.ca. 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 acropoliswarehousing.ca.

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.