Skip to main content

Security report for alikeaudience.com

AlikeAudience · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

AlikeAudience operates as a technology company specializing in providing high-performing audience segments for marketers, leveraging global mobile and transaction data to enhance marketing ROI. The company positions itself as a privacy-compliant data provider for major demand-side platforms (DSPs), targeting marketing professionals seeking effective audience segmentation solutions. The website is built on WordPress and integrates common marketing and analytics technologies such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and reCAPTCHA to support user interaction and data collection. However, the absence of WHOIS domain registration data raises concerns about the domain's legitimacy and ownership status, which warrants further verification. Security posture is moderate, with some best practices like reCAPTCHA implemented, but lacking visible security headers and explicit incident response information. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies on the site. Overall, the website presents professional content and good SEO optimization but requires improvements in transparency, security, and compliance to enhance trustworthiness and business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
70/ 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

6 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 alikeaudience.com

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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
70
Average
69

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

AlikeAudience targets the marketing technology sector, offering data-driven audience segmentation services that enable marketers to optimize campaign performance. The business model revolves around leveraging trusted mobile and transaction data to create global audience segments that comply with privacy regulations. The company appears to be a small-sized entity with a focused niche in data provisioning for marketing. The website content suggests a consistent brand presence and good content quality, but lacks explicit business contact details and certifications that would strengthen credibility. The use of Google marketing tools indicates an integration with mainstream digital marketing ecosystems. The lack of WHOIS data and contact information limits the ability to fully assess the company's operational scale and partnerships. Strategic growth could benefit from enhanced transparency and clearer communication of business credentials.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with HTTPS enabled (implied by external Google scripts loaded over HTTPS) and the use of reCAPTCHA to protect forms from automated abuse. However, no security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are important for mitigating common web vulnerabilities. The absence of explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms reduces the site's preparedness for security incidents and transparency towards users. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the HTML content, but the missing WHOIS data and lack of security best practices suggest room for improvement. The overall security score is moderate, with recommendations to implement security headers, publish security policies, and provide clear incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Verify and update domain registration details to ensure WHOIS information is complete and accurate.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Implement standard security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide explicit contact information for general inquiries and security incidents, including a dedicated security email.
  5. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
AlikeAudience
Description
High-performing audience segments for marketers to power ROI. Global segments from trusted mobile & transaction data. Privacy-compliant on major DSPs.
Key services
Audience segmentation, Data provisioning for marketing, Privacy-compliant data solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA, WordPress, LayerSlider
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of reCAPTCHA for forms

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
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website content is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. WHOIS data is missing, indicating potential domain registration issues.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage HTML.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  5. Website uses common marketing and analytics tools from Google.
  6. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL status unknown.
  7. Website built on WordPress with LayerSlider plugin.
  8. No visible security or incident response contact information.
  9. No certifications or compliance badges found.
  10. Content is professionally presented with good SEO metadata.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS and uses popular plugins such as LayerSlider for visual content and Google services for analytics and tag management. The technical implementation includes asynchronous loading of scripts to optimize performance. The site demonstrates good SEO practices with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data for organization and webpage information. Mobile optimization is good, and the site uses responsive design elements. However, no hosting provider information was detected, and performance is moderate based on script usage and CSS complexity. Accessibility features are basic, with some ARIA roles and semantic HTML elements present but no advanced accessibility enhancements. Technical risks include missing security headers and incomplete domain registration data, which could impact trust and operational stability.
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 alikeaudience.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 alikeaudience.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.