Skip to main content

Security report for amazee.io

Technology · N/a

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

87/100

Risk levelLow

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

amazee.io is a technology company providing a hosting platform designed to meet the needs of large enterprises, focusing on flexibility, data sovereignty, and security. The website content emphasizes enterprise-grade hosting solutions, targeting large organizations requiring secure and compliant infrastructure. The company positions itself as a provider of secure, flexible hosting services with a strong emphasis on data sovereignty, appealing to customers with strict regulatory and security requirements. The technical infrastructure of the website is built using modern web technologies including React and Gatsby, indicating a contemporary and performant digital presence. The site appears well-designed with good mobile optimization and SEO practices, although accessibility features are basic. The hosting provider and SSL configuration details are not explicitly disclosed in the content provided. From a security perspective, the website lacks visible security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies in the provided content, which are important for compliance and user trust. No contact information or incident response channels are clearly presented, which could be improved to enhance transparency and security posture. The WHOIS data is unavailable or privacy-protected, which is common for technology companies but limits domain trust analysis. Overall, the website is professional and content-rich, suitable for its enterprise audience, but would benefit from enhanced security and privacy disclosures to improve compliance and trustworthiness.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of amazee.io. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  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.

    • Medium

      Missing Permissions-Policy header

      Controls browser features and APIs

      What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access

      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Permissions-Policy: accelerometer=(), autoplay=(), camera=(), cross-origin-isolated=(),…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  3. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

  4. 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.

    • Medium

      SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

      SSL certificate expires in 59 days

      What to do: Plan SSL certificate renewal

  5. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035

Keep watching amazee.io

This scan found 14 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. See sample alerts.

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
95
Security headers
75
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
87

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

amazee.io operates in the technology sector as a hosting platform provider targeting large enterprises. Their business model revolves around providing secure, flexible hosting solutions that emphasize data sovereignty and security compliance. The company likely generates revenue through hosting service subscriptions and enterprise contracts. The website content suggests a focus on regulated industries or organizations with strict data governance needs. There is no explicit information about parent companies or subsidiaries. The company leverages modern web technologies to maintain a competitive digital presence. Strategic partnerships or certifications are not explicitly mentioned, which could be areas for growth and trust building.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is moderate but shows gaps. HTTPS is presumably enabled (not explicitly confirmed), but no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options are detected in the provided content. There are no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, but the absence of privacy and cookie policies, as well as lack of incident response contact information, indicates compliance and transparency gaps. The WHOIS data is privacy-protected, which is typical but limits domain trust verification. The site does not appear to use common tracking or analytics scripts, reducing privacy risks. Overall, the security maturity is basic and would benefit from formalized policies, security headers, and clear contact channels for security incidents.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and clearly publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to enhance GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection) to improve security posture.
  3. Ensure HTTPS is properly configured with strong SSL/TLS settings and verify with external tools.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and data protection officer contacts.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to foster responsible security reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Our hosting platform is designed to meet the needs of large enterprises, ensuring flexibility without compromising data sovereignty and security.
Key services
hosting platform
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Gatsby 4.13.1
Frameworks
React, Gatsby
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. WHOIS data unavailable due to privacy or malformed request
  2. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in provided HTML snippet
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in provided content
  5. Website uses modern React/Gatsby technology stack
  6. Content is enterprise-focused hosting platform emphasizing security and data sovereignty
  7. No security headers or SSL configuration details provided
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in provided content
  9. No advertising or affiliate programs detected
  10. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern React and Gatsby framework stack, which supports fast and responsive user experiences. The site loads various external resources such as Google Fonts and images hosted on prismic.io, indicating use of a headless CMS or content delivery network. The HTML content is well-structured with meta tags for SEO and social media sharing (Open Graph and Twitter cards). However, no explicit CMS is identified, and hosting provider details are not disclosed. Performance is likely moderate given the use of modern frameworks but could be improved with optimization of external resources. Accessibility is basic and could be enhanced with ARIA attributes and semantic HTML improvements. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, which may be intentional for privacy reasons.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 75/100Medium18 findings · partial scanView report
  2. 81/100Low24 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with amazee.io. 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 amazee.io.

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.