Skip to main content

Security report for arbd.com

Abramson, Brown and Dugan Law · Healthcare · United States

Partial score · DNS & email only

25/100

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

Abramson, Brown and Dugan is a specialized law firm based in New Hampshire focusing on medical malpractice and personal injury cases. The firm holds a strong market position in the state, recognized for winning more malpractice settlements and verdicts than any other local firm. Their website provides comprehensive information about their services, recent settlements, attorney profiles, and client testimonials, targeting individuals seeking legal representation for serious injury and malpractice claims. The business model centers on plaintiff legal services with a focus on compassionate client engagement and free consultations. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using the Enfold theme and integrates common technologies such as jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, and Google reCAPTCHA for form security. While the site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly, performance metrics indicate slow loading times, and accessibility features are basic. The site lacks a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which is a significant security concern. DNS records are missing or not publicly visible, which is inconsistent with the active website presence. Security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS, missing DNSSEC, CAA, and HSTS configurations, and lack of security headers. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are found, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. The site uses Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms but lacks a formal security or incident response policy. Overall, the site demonstrates strong business credibility and content quality but requires urgent improvements in security and privacy compliance. Strategically, the firm should prioritize obtaining and configuring a valid SSL certificate, properly configuring DNS records, and publishing comprehensive privacy and cookie policies. Enhancing security headers and implementing vulnerability disclosure mechanisms would further improve trust and compliance. These steps will reduce risk, improve user trust, and align the firm with modern security and privacy standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

Checks completed
5of 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

3 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.

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • 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 arbd.com

This scan found 5 issues across 4 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
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
0
Average
25

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 · found on this site
  • 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 firm is positioned as a leading malpractice and personal injury law firm in New Hampshire, leveraging a reputation built on high-value settlements and peer-recognized awards. Their business model is client-focused legal representation with free consultations to attract potential clients. The detailed settlement disclosures and testimonials serve as strong trust signals. The firm targets individuals affected by medical negligence and serious injuries, indicating a niche but critical market segment. The website content and structure support lead generation and client engagement. The absence of privacy and security policies may expose the firm to regulatory risks, but their marketing and client service approach is professional and effective.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the lack of HTTPS, missing DNS records, and absence of security headers and policies. While Google reCAPTCHA is implemented to protect forms, the lack of SSL exposes users to data interception risks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency and preparedness. The missing DNSSEC and CAA records reduce domain security against spoofing and unauthorized certificate issuance. Overall, the site is vulnerable to common web security threats and non-compliant with privacy regulations, which could impact client trust and legal compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Configure complete and correct DNS records including A, NS, MX, TXT, DNSSEC, and CAA.
  3. Publish clear and comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance statements.
  4. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS with preload.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and security culture.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Abramson, Brown and Dugan Law
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a WordPress CMS with the Enfold theme and integrates several common plugins and third-party services including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Google reCAPTCHA. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly with proper meta tags and structured data. However, performance data is missing or zero, indicating potential issues with speed or measurement. The absence of HTTPS and incomplete DNS configuration are critical technical deficiencies. The site uses modern JavaScript libraries but lacks advanced accessibility features. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs but requires modernization and security hardening.
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 arbd.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 arbd.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.