Skip to main content

Security report for amark.com

A-Mark Precious Metals, Inc. · Finance · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

A-Mark Precious Metals, Inc. operates a professional website focused on precious metals trading and distribution, including gold, silver, platinum, and palladium. The company targets investors and financial institutions seeking precious metals investment opportunities. The website is built on WordPress with WooCommerce, indicating a mature e-commerce infrastructure. The presence of a cookie consent banner and privacy policy demonstrates attention to privacy compliance, particularly GDPR. However, no explicit contact information or detailed security policies are publicly available, which could be improved to enhance trust. The WHOIS data is unavailable or privacy protected, which raises some concerns but does not negate the professional appearance and functionality of the site.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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. 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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  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 amark.com

This scan found 25 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
37
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
60

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 positions itself as a significant player in the precious metals market, offering trading and distribution services. The business model revolves around facilitating precious metals transactions for institutional and retail clients. The website's design and content suggest a large enterprise with a focus on trust and professionalism. The lack of visible contact details on the homepage may indicate a controlled client engagement approach, possibly requiring login or direct contact through other channels. The company appears to maintain a clean digital footprint with no obvious third-party partnerships or subsidiaries listed on the site.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a cookie consent mechanism, indicating baseline security and privacy practices. However, the absence of visible security headers and public security policies suggests room for improvement in security transparency. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. The lack of a security.txt file or incident response contact information limits the ability for external parties to report security issues effectively. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could benefit from enhanced security best practices and public disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Provide explicit security and incident response policies accessible to users and security researchers.
  3. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosures.
  4. Enhance contact information visibility to improve customer trust and support.
  5. Regularly audit and update privacy and cookie policies to maintain compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
A-Mark Precious Metals, Inc.
Description
A-Mark Precious Metals, Inc.
Key services
Precious metals trading, Distribution of gold, silver, platinum, palladium
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WooCommerce, WPBakery Page Builder, FontAwesome, Osano Consent Management
Frameworks
WooCommerce
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Osano Consent Management
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 challenge
  2. Professional design and clear navigation
  3. Uses WordPress and WooCommerce for e-commerce functionality
  4. Has cookie consent banner compliant with GDPR
  5. No visible contact emails or phone numbers on homepage
  6. WHOIS data unavailable or privacy protected
  7. No explicit security policies or incident response info publicly available
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages a modern WordPress CMS with WooCommerce for e-commerce capabilities and WPBakery Page Builder for content management. It uses standard web fonts from Google Fonts and FontAwesome icons. The site includes Osano for cookie consent management, indicating compliance with privacy regulations. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. The technical stack is standard for e-commerce sites but could be enhanced with additional security and performance optimizations.
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 amark.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 amark.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.