Skip to main content

Security report for amlmalta.com

AML – Atlantis Management Ltd. · Transportation · Malta

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

AML – Atlantis Management Ltd. is a Malta-based maritime service provider specializing in crew management, port and husbandry agency services, Malta flag registration, yachting, vessel surveying, corporate services, and seafarer social security. Established in 2002, AML positions itself as a trusted partner in the maritime industry, offering comprehensive compliance and management solutions tailored to the needs of ship owners and managers. The company targets maritime clients requiring expert local knowledge and regulatory compliance in Malta. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using the Salient theme and WPBakery page builder, leveraging modern web technologies and CDN hosting via Cloudfront for performance. The site is mobile-optimized and includes SEO best practices. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and uses Cookiebot for cookie consent, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit security or incident response policies. Overall, AML demonstrates a solid digital presence with room for improvement in security transparency and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

5 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

    • 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

  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 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 amlmalta.com

This scan found 19 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
50
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
56

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

AML holds a strong market position within the Maltese maritime sector, leveraging long-standing client relationships and a broad service portfolio. Their business model focuses on providing in-house maritime management and compliance services, ensuring clients meet Maltese legislation requirements. The company’s growth is indicated by recent job postings and active news updates. Their partnership ecosystem includes social media engagement on Facebook and LinkedIn. Revenue streams likely derive from service contracts in crew management, vessel services, and corporate compliance. The website content and domain registration data align well, supporting credibility. Strategic observations suggest AML could enhance trust by publishing detailed security policies and terms of service.

Security posture

AML’s website security posture is moderate to good. HTTPS is properly implemented, and cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, indicating GDPR awareness. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could hinder rapid mitigation of security events. No vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The use of third-party scripts like Google Tag Manager and Drift Chat introduces potential risk vectors that require ongoing monitoring. Overall, AML should improve security transparency and implement additional HTTP security headers to strengthen protection.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance by expanding cookie and data retention disclosures.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
AML – Atlantis Management Ltd.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
AML – Atlantis Management Ltd.
Description
Securing the right solutions for all your maritime needs with AML Ltd. Provides a superior all round service for the maritime industry including crew management, port and husbandry agency, Malta flag registration, yachting, vessel surveying, corporate services, and seafarer social security.
Key services
Crew Management, Port and Husbandry Agency, Malta Flag Registration, Yachting, Vessel Surveying, Corporate Services, Seafarer Malta Social Security
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, Drift Chat
Frameworks
Salient WordPress Theme, WPBakery Page Builder
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent via Cookiebot
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot, Drift
Marketing tools
Drift Chat
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with clear maritime industry focus
  2. Content is comprehensive about services and company background
  3. Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented
  4. No visible security policy or incident response information
  5. No terms of service page found
  6. Contact information is clearly presented in footer
  7. Use of modern WordPress theme and plugins
  8. No signs of blocking or WAF challenges
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using the Salient theme and WPBakery page builder, indicating a mature and flexible infrastructure. Hosting via AWS Cloudfront CDN supports good global performance. The site includes Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot for consent management, and Drift for live chat, reflecting a well-integrated marketing and user engagement stack. Performance is moderate with room for optimization, especially in accessibility features. SEO is well addressed with Yoast SEO plugin metadata and structured data in JSON-LD format. Technical risks include reliance on multiple third-party scripts and lack of advanced security headers. Opportunities exist to modernize security posture and improve accessibility compliance.
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 amlmalta.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 amlmalta.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.