Skip to main content

Security report for apsislead.com

APSIS Lead - Login · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

APSIS Lead operates a web-based platform focused on lead management or marketing services, as indicated by the login portal and domain context. The website targets business users requiring access to lead management tools, operating likely as a SaaS platform. The technical infrastructure relies on standard web technologies including JavaScript, jQuery, Google Fonts, and Google Analytics, hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure. Performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4 seconds and basic mobile optimization. However, the website lacks a valid SSL/TLS certificate, serving content without HTTPS, which is a critical security flaw. No security headers or modern security practices are implemented, and no privacy or cookie policies are publicly available, indicating poor privacy compliance. The absence of contact information and trust indicators further reduces business credibility. Overall, the site is functional but exhibits significant security and compliance gaps that must be addressed to improve trust and protect user data.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 100 · Critical
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. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

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

Keep watching apsislead.com

This scan found 20 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
85
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
64

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

APSIS Lead appears positioned as a technology provider in the lead management and marketing sector, offering a login-based SaaS platform. The business model likely revolves around subscription or user-based access to marketing tools. The lack of public business information, contact details, or certifications limits visibility into market positioning and competitive advantages. The use of third-party tracking tools like Google Analytics and ProspectEye suggests an emphasis on user behavior analytics. The domain registration and DNS setup are consistent with legitimate operations, hosted on AWS with Google MX records for email. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident from the data. Growth indicators and revenue streams are not discernible from the available information.

Security posture

The security posture of the APSIS Lead website is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No HTTP security headers such as HSTS or Content-Security-Policy are configured, and session management security is unclear. The site does not implement a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file, limiting transparency and incident response readiness. While no known vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, the lack of encryption and security best practices significantly increases risk. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. Immediate remediation is required to secure user credentials and improve overall security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers including HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  4. Add visible contact information and establish a security incident response contact channel.
  5. Introduce a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance transparency and trust.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a basic technology stack with JavaScript, jQuery, Google Fonts, and Font Awesome for UI elements. Hosting is on Amazon AWS as indicated by DNS records. Performance is moderate with a page size of approximately 44 KB and 14 resource requests, loading in about 4 seconds. The site lacks modern TLS protocols and does not use HTTPS, which is a major technical deficiency. No CMS or advanced frameworks are detected. SEO and accessibility features are minimal, and no structured data or Open Graph metadata is present. The site includes tracking scripts from Google Analytics and ProspectEye, indicating moderate user tracking. Technical debt is evident in the lack of security and privacy implementations, and modernization opportunities include adopting HTTPS, improving performance, and enhancing SEO and accessibility.
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 apsislead.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 apsislead.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.