Skip to main content

Security report for amberstudio.com

Amber · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 2 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and Network security.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Amber is a full-service global game development company established in 2008, operating as an integrated hub with multidisciplinary global locations. The company targets game developers, publishers, and clients seeking comprehensive game development services. Their market position is that of an established mid-sized player in the technology sector, focusing on delivering high-quality game production services. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks such as Nuxt.js and Tailwind CSS, hosted on Microsoft Azure DNS infrastructure, and employs multiple analytics and marketing tools including Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, and Apollo.io. The site is mobile-optimized and demonstrates good SEO and accessibility practices. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and uses domain locking mechanisms but lacks explicit published security policies or incident response contacts. Privacy compliance is basic, with a cookie consent mechanism in place but no visible privacy or terms of service pages. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy, with room for improvement in transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

2 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

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching amberstudio.com

This scan found 17 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
72
Security headers
85
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
83
Average
71

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 amberstudio.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
570
Employees
30
Customers
57
Third parties
483
Weak passwords
2%

Latest record dated 2026-06-10 · 5 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for amberstudio.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –jira.amberstudio.com2026-06-10
  • –confluence.amberstudio.com2026-06-06
  • –confluence.amberstudio.com2026-05-30
  • –jira.amberstudio.com2026-05-15
  • –jira.amberstudio.com2026-05-03

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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

Amber operates in the technology sector, specifically in game development, offering a full-service model that integrates multidisciplinary teams across global locations. The company benefits from a long-established domain and professional branding, indicating stable market presence. Their business model likely includes project-based revenue streams from game development contracts and partnerships. The extensive use of tracking and analytics tools suggests a focus on marketing and client acquisition. No direct contact information or detailed corporate data is publicly available on the site, which may limit direct client engagement but maintains a clean professional image. The lack of visible certifications or compliance statements suggests potential areas for growth in trust and regulatory adherence.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with HTTPS enabled and domain status locks preventing unauthorized changes. However, the absence of explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates gaps in security transparency and readiness. The site uses multiple third-party tracking scripts, which may introduce privacy concerns if not properly managed. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a recommended security enhancement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be strengthened by publishing security policies, enabling DNSSEC, and implementing a security.txt file.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and transparency.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Create and publish a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate security maturity.
  4. Implement a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
  5. Review and audit third-party tracking scripts to ensure privacy compliance and minimize data exposure.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Amber
Description
Built by a collective of artisans, Amber functions as an integrated hub with multidisciplinary global locations.
Key services
game development, multidisciplinary game production, global studio collaboration
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Vue.js (implied by Nuxt.js usage), Apollo.io tracking, Hotjar, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, TikTok Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, CookieYes Consent Management
Frameworks
Nuxt.js (Vue.js SSR framework), Tailwind CSS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security-related scripts for analytics and tracking

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar, Apollo.io, TikTok Analytics, Facebook Analytics, LinkedIn Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
TikTok Pixel, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar
Marketing tools
Apollo.io website tracker
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with modern UI/UX.
  2. Extensive use of tracking and analytics scripts indicating marketing focus.
  3. No explicit privacy or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via CookieYes.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  7. Domain is well maintained with long registration and security locks.
  8. No suspicious or malicious indicators detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including Nuxt.js (Vue.js framework) and Tailwind CSS for styling, indicating a contemporary and maintainable codebase. Hosting is supported by Microsoft Azure DNS infrastructure, providing reliable DNS services. The site loads multiple analytics and marketing scripts asynchronously, which may impact performance but supports extensive user tracking and marketing efforts. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Performance is moderate, with opportunities to optimize script loading and reduce third-party dependencies to improve speed and user experience.
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 amberstudio.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 amberstudio.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.