Skip to main content

Security report for auditdata.com

Auditdata · Hospital & health care · Denmark

Partial score · DNS & email only

74/100

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

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
5of 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
    • 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';…

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

Keep watching auditdata.com

This scan found 13 issues across 3 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

Security headers
15
Email security
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
74

Not counted

  • SSL/TLS: did not complete in this scan.
  • DNS health: 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

Auditdata operates in the healthcare sector, targeting hearing care professionals and patients with a B2B and B2C business model. Their key services include software solutions, hardware devices, and audiology-related services. The company appears to be medium-sized with consistent branding and good content quality. The website's use of social media, particularly Twitter, indicates engagement with their audience. However, the lack of visible contact information and privacy policies may impact user trust and compliance. The missing WHOIS data suggests either privacy protection or a registration anomaly, which should be further investigated. The company’s market positioning as a specialized audiology technology provider is clear, but additional transparency in business and compliance information would strengthen credibility.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a cookie consent mechanism via Cookiebot, indicating awareness of privacy and security compliance requirements. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics, which is common but requires proper configuration to avoid privacy issues. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages were found, which is a compliance gap. Security headers are partially detected or inferred but not explicitly confirmed in the provided data. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the analysis. The absence of a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy limits the ability for external security researchers to report issues. Incident response contact information is not provided, which is a weakness in security readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with clearer policies and enhanced header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy page detailing GDPR compliance and data handling practices.
  2. Add explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security-related inquiries.
  4. Implement a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Auditdata
Description
Auditdata provides software, hardware, and services that enable the best care for patients—before, during, and after treatment. Through innovative, data-driven technology, Auditdata connects the customer journey to enhance comfort and trust between individual patients and the hearing care professionals working closest to them.
Key services
Software solutions, Hardware devices, Audiology services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot
Frameworks
Umbraco Forms
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • Google Tag Manager for analytics

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. No WHOIS registration data available, indicating possible unregistered domain or privacy protection.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via Cookiebot.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the visible content.
  6. Social media presence detected only on Twitter (@AuditdataCom).
  7. Website uses Umbraco CMS and Umbraco Forms plugin.
  8. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking.
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  10. No explicit security or incident response contact information 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

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with auditdata.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 auditdata.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.

auditdata.com security report (partial scan) | Guard