Skip to main content

Security report for atakama.com

Atakama · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

Atakama is a technology company offering a managed browser security platform tailored for Managed Service Providers (MSPs). Their platform focuses on transforming browsers into secure and manageable workspaces, protecting applications, data, and users. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with good SEO and structured data implementation. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern tracking and marketing technologies integrated, including Google Tag Manager and multiple advertising pixels. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, but lacks visible security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of privacy and cookie policies and no consent mechanisms. WHOIS data is missing, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy and trustworthiness. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires improvements in transparency, privacy compliance, and security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

3 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • 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

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

Keep watching atakama.com

This scan found 14 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
100
Security headers
70
Email security
68
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
80

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

Atakama targets MSPs with a niche security product focused on browser security, positioning itself as a specialized technology provider in the cybersecurity space. The business model revolves around providing managed security solutions, likely subscription-based. The company leverages multiple marketing and tracking tools to reach and analyze its audience. The lack of detailed company information and contact data on the website limits full business intelligence insights. The social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn indicates active engagement channels. The absence of WHOIS data and contact details may impact customer trust and partnership opportunities.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a fundamental security requirement. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces protection against common web attacks. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no contact channels for security incidents are provided. The presence of multiple third-party tracking scripts increases the attack surface and privacy risks. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires significant enhancements in policy transparency, header implementation, and privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Implement and enforce security headers to protect against common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident response contacts.
  4. Add cookie consent mechanisms to comply with privacy regulations.
  5. Improve WHOIS transparency or provide verified domain registration information to enhance trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Atakama
Description
Transform the browser into a secure and easily managed workspace. Protect applications, data, and people by securing today’s Window of Work.
Key services
Managed Browser Security Platform, Workspace Security, Application and Data Protection
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Bing Ads, AdRoll, Reddit Pixel, Twitter Universal Website Tag, LinkedIn Insight Tag, ZoomInfo Pixel, TechTarget Tracking
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager implied)
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads, AdRoll
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Reddit Pixel, Twitter Universal Website Tag, LinkedIn Insight Tag, ZoomInfo Pixel, TechTarget Tracking
Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content
  2. No WHOIS data available, indicating possible privacy protection or unregistered domain
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided content
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the content
  5. Multiple third-party tracking and advertising scripts are present
  6. Website uses WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin
  7. Good SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD) present
  8. No visible security headers detected in the provided data
  9. HTTPS is enabled and appears properly configured
  10. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses WordPress CMS with the Astra theme and Yoast SEO plugin, indicating a modern and SEO-optimized infrastructure. Multiple third-party scripts for analytics, advertising, and marketing are integrated, including Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and others. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate, likely impacted by numerous external scripts. No forms were detected in the provided content, suggesting limited direct data collection on the homepage. The absence of visible security headers and WHOIS data are technical risks that should be addressed to improve security and trust.
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 atakama.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 atakama.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.