Skip to main content

Security report for atriumcph.com

Atrium copenhagen · Pharmaceuticals · Denmark

Partial score · DNS & email only

75/100

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

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of atriumcph.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
Not assessed
GDPR outside view
Not assessed

Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.

Priority findings

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

  2. DNS health

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

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035

Keep watching atriumcph.com

This scan found 5 issues across 2 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

Email security
85
DNS health
85
Average
85
After the cap
75

Not counted

  • SSL/TLS: did not complete in this scan.
  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • Network security: 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
  • 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

Atrium operates in the education sector, specifically targeting life science and pharmaceutical professionals. Its business model revolves around providing specialized training courses and professional networking opportunities, which likely generate revenue through course fees and membership subscriptions. The company maintains active social media profiles on Facebook and LinkedIn, enhancing its market reach and engagement. The presence of detailed cookie and privacy policies indicates a strong compliance posture with European data protection regulations. The use of third-party marketing and analytics platforms suggests a focus on data-driven growth and customer insights. However, the lack of visible terms of service and security policies may limit trust for some users. The company appears to be a small-sized entity based in Denmark with no publicly disclosed parent or subsidiary relationships.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enforced and a detailed cookie consent mechanism that categorizes cookies by purpose and duration, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is found, which limits transparency and readiness for incident response. The WHOIS data is missing, which could be a red flag for domain legitimacy, though the website content and contact details appear legitimate. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved by adding security headers and publishing incident response information.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Clarify domain registration details and ensure WHOIS information is accurate and publicly available to improve trustworthiness.
  5. Maintain and update privacy and cookie policies regularly, ensuring they reflect current data processing practices and compliance requirements.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Atrium
Description
We offer valuable learning experiences that help you advance professionally: Courses and networks in all pharmaceutical industry areas.
Key services
Courses, Networks, Seminars, Exams, Competence development
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
YouTube iframe API, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Sleeknote, CookieInformation Consent Management
Frameworks
C1 CMS Foundation
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with detailed categories
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Bing
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Adform, Google Marketing Platform, Microsoft Bing
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Sleeknote
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS with valid SSL
  2. Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism with detailed categories and cookie info
  3. Privacy and cookie policies are present and detailed
  4. No terms of service page found
  5. Contact info includes email, phone, and physical address in Copenhagen, Denmark
  6. Social media presence on Facebook and LinkedIn
  7. Use of modern marketing and analytics tools
  8. No visible security headers in HTML source
  9. WHOIS data missing, raising some legitimacy questions
  10. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 58/100Medium32 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with atriumcph.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 atriumcph.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.

atriumcph.com security report (partial scan) | Guard