Skip to main content

Security report for aucklandmarathon.co.nz

IRONMAN New Zealand Limited · Hospitality · New Zealand

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Auckland Marathon website represents IRONMAN New Zealand Limited's flagship running event, showcasing a well-established and reputable marathon with a history dating back to 2000. The site effectively targets runners and sports enthusiasts with detailed race information, multiple race options, and strong branding partnerships including Barfoot & Thompson and ASICS. The business model centers on event management, sponsorship, and merchandise sales, positioning itself as New Zealand's premier marathon event. Technically, the website employs a mature technology stack including SilverStripe CMS, Bootstrap, jQuery, and integrates marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel. Hosting and DNS services leverage Cloudflare for performance and security. The site is mobile-optimized with good SEO practices, though some technical debt is noted with older jQuery versions and lack of DNSSEC. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses cookie consent mechanisms compliant with GDPR. However, it lacks some advanced security headers and does not publish a vulnerability disclosure or security policy. The absence of DNSSEC and use of older libraries present moderate risks. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained with a strong business credibility score. Strategic improvements in security posture and transparency would further enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

4 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 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 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

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching aucklandmarathon.co.nz

This scan found 19 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
65
Security headers
70
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
72

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 Auckland Marathon is a leading event in New Zealand's sports and hospitality sector, leveraging strong partnerships with major brands and local tourism bodies. Its competitive advantage lies in its iconic status, diverse race offerings, and cultural significance. Revenue streams include race entry fees, sponsorships, merchandise, and app services. The target market includes local and international runners, students (with discounts), and charity participants. Growth indicators include expanding race distances and digital engagement through apps and social media. The partnership ecosystem is robust, involving global sports brands and local economic development agencies.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforcement and cookie consent compliance. However, it lacks comprehensive security headers and a public incident response or vulnerability disclosure framework. The use of an older jQuery version and absence of DNSSEC are notable gaps. No direct contact channels for security incidents were found. Data protection practices appear adequate but could be improved with explicit policies and transparency. Overall, the security culture is functional but would benefit from formalization and modernization.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a security.txt file and a clear vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  3. Implement additional HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Upgrade jQuery and other third-party libraries to current versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  5. Add a visible terms of service page to improve legal clarity and user trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
IRONMAN New Zealand Limited
Registration number
9429034266335
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
IRONMAN New Zealand Limited
Description
Auckland Marathon is New Zealand’s biggest, most iconic, colourful, cultural running celebration offering multiple race distances including marathon, half marathon, 11km Traverse, Family 5km & kids run event. 2025 entries are open.
Key services
Marathon event organization, Race registration, Athlete tracking app, Merchandise sales, Charity running programs
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 3.3.6, jQuery 1.11.3, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Google Publisher Tags, OneTrust Cookie Consent, Typekit Fonts, SilverStripe CMS
Frameworks
SilverStripe
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel with nonce attributes
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ad Manager, Google Adsense
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Facebook Pixel, OneTrust Cookie Consent
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with clear branding and consistent sponsor logos.
  2. Content is rich with event details, race options, and participant information.
  3. Multiple social media channels are linked and active.
  4. No visible contact emails or phone numbers directly on homepage; contact via forms and footer address only.
  5. No explicit terms of service page found.
  6. Cookie consent is implemented via OneTrust.
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information published.
  8. Use of older jQuery version may pose minor security risk.
  9. No DNSSEC enabled for domain.
  10. Use of Google Ads and Facebook Pixel for marketing and tracking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is solid, using SilverStripe CMS and Bootstrap for responsive design. Integration with Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel supports marketing and analytics needs. Hosting via Cloudflare provides CDN and DNS services, improving performance and security. The site loads moderately fast with good mobile optimization. Some technical debt is present due to older jQuery usage and missing DNSSEC. SEO and accessibility are adequately addressed but could be enhanced with more ARIA roles and semantic markup. Overall, the technical implementation supports business goals effectively with room for modernization.
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 aucklandmarathon.co.nz. 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 aucklandmarathon.co.nz.

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.