Skip to main content

Security report for assistica.com

Assistica · Healthcare · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Assistica operates a website focused on compression hosiery and orthopedic products, targeting patients and healthcare providers. The business model appears to be e-commerce combined with product information dissemination. The website is hosted on Google Sites, indicating a basic but stable technical infrastructure. The site uses HTTPS and Google services but lacks advanced security headers and formal privacy or terms of service documentation. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy, impacting trustworthiness. Overall, the site is functional but basic in design and content quality, with room for improvement in privacy and security compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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. 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

  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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  3. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      Domain Expires Soon

      Domain expires in 14 days

      What to do: Renew domain registration before expiration

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

Keep watching assistica.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
95
Security headers
70
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
74

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

The company targets a niche healthcare market segment providing compression and orthopedic products. The presence of Amazon affiliate links suggests a revenue stream through affiliate marketing. The website content is minimal but relevant, focusing on product instructions, size charts, and FAQs. The lack of detailed company information and contact details limits transparency. The business appears small and specialized, with no evidence of parent or subsidiary companies. The use of Google Sites suggests a low-cost digital presence, possibly indicating a small or startup operation.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a fundamental security measure. However, it lacks additional security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No security or incident response policies are published, and no contact channels for security incidents are provided. The absence of WHOIS data is a significant trust concern. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. Overall, the security posture is basic and could be improved with standard best practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement standard security headers to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Clarify domain registration status and ensure WHOIS data is publicly available to improve legitimacy.
  4. Add explicit company contact emails and phone numbers on the contact page for better user support and trust.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Assistica
Description
Compression hosiery and orthopedic products
Key services
Compression hosiery, Orthopedic products, Product instructions and size charts
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Sites, Google Fonts, Google APIs
Platforms
Google Sites
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (implied by Google APIs usage)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is hosted on Google Sites platform
  2. No WHOIS data available indicating possible domain registration issues
  3. No privacy policy or terms of service pages found
  4. Cookie consent banner present and functional
  5. Contact information limited to contact page with no explicit emails or phone numbers
  6. No security headers detected beyond HTTPS
  7. Affiliate link to Amazon present
  8. Content is focused on compression hosiery and orthopedic products
  9. No adult or explicit content detected
  10. Basic SEO and accessibility features present
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Google Sites, leveraging Google Fonts and Google APIs, which ensures stable hosting and basic performance. The site is mobile optimized and uses HTTPS. However, the technical implementation is basic with minimal SEO and accessibility features. There is no evidence of advanced frameworks or CMS beyond Google Sites. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected. The site could benefit from enhanced SEO, accessibility improvements, and additional security configurations to reduce technical debt and improve 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 assistica.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 assistica.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.