Skip to main content

Security report for alinda.com

Astatine Investment Partners · Transportation · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Astatine Investment Partners is a private equity firm specializing in mid-market infrastructure investments and equipment leasing. The company positions itself as a leading player in this niche, targeting investors and infrastructure market participants. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with a focus on delivering value through innovative investment strategies. The business model centers on private equity investments in infrastructure sectors, supported by a medium-sized organizational footprint and a founding date of 2022. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern SEO practices implemented via the Yoast SEO plugin. The site uses jQuery and Google Fonts, and it demonstrates good mobile optimization and moderate performance. Accessibility is basic but functional, and SEO optimization is good. Hosting details are not explicitly disclosed. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration but lacks several recommended security headers. There is no visible security policy or incident response contact information, and no vulnerability disclosure mechanism is present. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Privacy compliance is partial, with a comprehensive privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professionally maintained, with a strong business credibility score. Recommendations include enhancing security headers, adding cookie consent for GDPR compliance, publishing security policies, and implementing a vulnerability disclosure process to improve the security posture and compliance maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 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

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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 alinda.com

This scan found 22 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
0
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
51

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 infrastructure investment sector, focusing on mid-market opportunities and equipment leasing. Their competitive advantage lies in specialized investment expertise and a clear market positioning as a leading private equity firm in this niche. The business model relies on attracting investors and managing infrastructure assets. The website content and news updates indicate active engagement and growth. The LinkedIn presence supports professional networking and brand visibility. No direct revenue streams or detailed financial data are disclosed. The partnership ecosystem is not explicitly detailed, but the site links to LinkedIn and maintains a professional online presence.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and no critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. There is no published security policy or incident response contact, which limits transparency and readiness for security incidents. GDPR compliance is partially demonstrated through a privacy policy but lacks cookie consent mechanisms. The site does not provide a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file, which could hinder responsible vulnerability reporting. Overall, the security culture appears basic but could be significantly improved with targeted enhancements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to ensure full GDPR compliance and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy page and provide clear incident response contact information to improve trust and readiness.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting and engagement with security researchers.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and plugins to avoid potential vulnerabilities and maintain a secure technology stack.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Astatine Investment Partners
Description
Astatine Investment Partners is a leading private equity firm focused on mid-market infrastructure investments and equipment leasing.
Key services
Infrastructure investments, Equipment leasing, Private equity
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, jQuery, Google Fonts
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well maintained.
  2. Content is focused on infrastructure investment and equipment leasing.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage; contact likely via form.
  4. No cookie consent banner detected despite GDPR compliance indication.
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response contacts published.
  6. No visible advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  7. Social media presence limited to LinkedIn.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS version 6.7.1, utilizing the Yoast SEO plugin for search engine optimization. It employs jQuery 3.5.1 and Google Fonts for typography. The site loads CSS and JavaScript assets from its own domain and Google CDN. Performance is moderate, with video content and SVG graphics used for branding and visual appeal. Mobile optimization is good, with responsive design elements and viewport meta tags. Accessibility features are basic, with some CSS customizations for headings and counters. SEO is well addressed with canonical tags, Open Graph metadata, and structured JSON-LD data. Hosting provider details are not explicitly disclosed in the HTML content.
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 alinda.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 alinda.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.