Skip to main content

Security report for aiamd.com

Associates in Anesthesia · Healthcare · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Associates in Anesthesia, Inc. is a well-established anesthesia services provider operating primarily in Pennsylvania, serving hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers, and office-based care. The company emphasizes clinical expertise and personalized patient care, positioning itself as a premier anesthesia practice with a history dating back to 1961. Their website reflects a professional healthcare service provider with clear service offerings and patient resources. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern SEO and analytics tools integrated, providing a good user experience with mobile optimization and accessibility features. Security posture is strong with HTTPS and no visible vulnerabilities, though some security headers and policies could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable concern for domain legitimacy, but the website content and business information appear credible. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and transparency.

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

7 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 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

  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';…

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

Keep watching aiamd.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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
61

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention aiamd.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for aiamd.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 healthcare sector, focusing on anesthesia services across multiple facility types. Their business model is service-oriented, targeting hospitals, surgery centers, and patients requiring anesthesia. The presence of a career section indicates growth and recruitment efforts. Payment processing is handled by third-party services, indicating a partnership ecosystem. The website's SEO and content strategy support patient education and service promotion. The lack of WHOIS transparency is a risk factor but does not currently impact operational credibility. The company appears to have a stable market position within its regional healthcare niche.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses standard security best practices, including secure forms and no exposed sensitive data. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and does not provide a public security or incident response policy. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy but no cookie consent mechanism. The absence of WHOIS data reduces trust and may indicate privacy protection or registration issues. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced with additional policies and headers.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a cookie consent banner to comply with privacy regulations and improve user trust.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to harden security.
  3. Publish a clear incident response and security policy page to demonstrate security maturity.
  4. Provide terms of service to clarify legal and operational terms for users.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Associates in Anesthesia
Description
Associates in Anesthesia is a leader in anesthesia services for hospitals and facilities in Pennsylvania. The practice serves hospitals, ambulatory surgery centers, and office-based care with a team of anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, physician assistants, and staff dedicated to patient support.
Key services
Anesthesia services in surgery centers, hospitals, office-based locations, Patient resources and education, Concierge anesthesia care, Career opportunities for anesthesia professionals
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Yoast SEO plugin, WordPress, Material Icons, JavaScript, CSS
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries
  • Secure forms with proper labeling

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is focused on anesthesia services in Pennsylvania with clear business purpose.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  4. Privacy policy page exists but cookie consent mechanism is missing.
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages detected.
  6. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  8. WHOIS data missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using a modern theme and integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking. It uses Yoast SEO for search engine optimization and Material Icons for UI elements. The site is mobile responsive and accessible, with ARIA labels and screen reader support. Performance is moderate with optimized images and CSS. No outdated or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid with room for improvement in security headers and privacy compliance.
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 aiamd.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 aiamd.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.