Skip to main content

Security report for architectsalliance.com

architects—Alliance · Real Estate · Canada

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

architects—Alliance is a Toronto-based architectural design practice specializing in city building and a broad range of architectural services including schools, galleries, affordable housing, and urban parks. They serve clients in Canada, the United States, and Europe, positioning themselves as designers, researchers, and urbanists focused on meaningful urban spaces. The website presents a professional portfolio with detailed project imagery and client testimonials, reflecting a well-established presence in the architectural sector. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies such as HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, jQuery, and lazy loading for images, along with Adobe Typekit fonts for typography. The site is mobile optimized and accessible, with an explicit accessibility statement demonstrating commitment to inclusivity. However, no CMS or hosting provider details are evident, and performance is moderate. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but no explicit security headers detected. The absence of privacy and cookie policies, WHOIS registration data, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms represent compliance and trust gaps. No forms on the homepage reduce exposure to input-based vulnerabilities. Social media presence is limited to Twitter and Instagram. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy in content and design but requires improvements in domain registration transparency, privacy compliance, and security best practices to enhance trust and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

8 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 architectsalliance.com

This scan found 25 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
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
61

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 architectsalliance.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4
Employees
0
Customers
3
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
75%

1 subdomain 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 architectsalliance.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

The company operates in the Real Estate sector, specifically architectural design and urban planning. Its business model revolves around providing comprehensive architectural services to a diverse client base across North America and Europe. The firm leverages its expertise in city building and design research to differentiate itself in a competitive market. The website's portfolio and testimonials indicate a strong market position with a focus on quality and innovation. Growth potential is supported by international collaborations. The absence of detailed business registration data and privacy policies suggests areas for operational maturity improvement.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate. The website uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS. No forms on the homepage reduce attack surface, but the absence of a security.txt or incident response contact limits readiness for vulnerability reporting. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. WHOIS data is unavailable, raising legitimacy concerns. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a brochure site but should be enhanced to meet higher compliance and trust standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Register the domain properly and ensure WHOIS data is available and accurate to enhance legitimacy and trust.
  3. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to strengthen security posture.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and publish security.txt to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Maintain and update accessibility features and provide clear contact channels for security and privacy inquiries.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
architects—Alliance
Description
a—A is a design practice based in Toronto engaged in the act of city building, providing full architectural services across a wide range of contexts, scales and building types—from schools, galleries and cultural centres, to affordable housing and mixed-use developments, to urban parks and civic precincts. They work with clients and collaborators in Canada, the United States, and Europe. They are designers, researchers and urbanists who care about the city, and take care to create spaces that give meaning and invention to the ways we live and work.
Key services
Architectural design, Urban planning, City building, Design research
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, jQuery, lazysizes (lazy loading images), Adobe Typekit fonts
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage implied by URLs
  • No forms detected on homepage to expose inputs

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Professional architectural firm website with detailed project portfolio
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found on homepage
  3. WHOIS data missing, indicating possible domain registration issues
  4. No forms detected on homepage; contact info provided in footer overlay
  5. Social media presence on Twitter and Instagram
  6. Accessibility statement present and comprehensive
  7. No security.txt or incident response info found
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond jQuery and lazy loading
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, and jQuery. It uses lazy loading for images to optimize performance and Adobe Typekit for fonts. The site is mobile responsive and includes accessibility features with a detailed accessibility statement. No CMS or backend platform is identified, suggesting a custom or static site. Performance is moderate with no major technical issues detected. The absence of analytics or tracking scripts indicates minimal user tracking. Technical risks include missing security headers and incomplete domain registration data.
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 architectsalliance.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 architectsalliance.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.