Skip to main content

Security report for avigilon.com

Avigilon · Technology · N/a

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

Avigilon is a global enterprise specializing in end-to-end security solutions, including video surveillance and access control systems. The company serves over 100,000 organizations worldwide, positioning itself as a trusted provider in the security technology sector. Their offerings include integrated platforms such as Avigilon Unity and Alta, targeting enterprise customers requiring comprehensive security management. The website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design, clear navigation, and mobile optimization. Technically, the site leverages modern JavaScript frameworks, HubSpot CMS, and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing, indicating a well-maintained infrastructure. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS, includes standard security headers, and uses secure forms, but lacks explicit public security policies or incident response details. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable anomaly, potentially indicating privacy protection or data retrieval issues, which slightly impacts trustworthiness. Overall, Avigilon's website demonstrates strong business credibility and technical maturity, with room for improvement in transparency around security and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching avigilon.com

This scan found 22 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
77
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
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

Avigilon operates in the technology sector, focusing on security solutions for enterprises and large organizations. Their business model is B2B, providing hardware and software security products. The company enjoys a strong market position with a large customer base and a reputation for integrated security platforms. Revenue streams likely include product sales, software licenses, and service contracts. The target audience includes security managers, IT professionals, and enterprise decision-makers. The website indicates a consistent branding strategy and professional content, supporting their enterprise market positioning. Partnerships and integrations with other security technologies are implied but not explicitly detailed on the site. The lack of detailed WHOIS data and security policy disclosures suggests areas for strategic enhancement in transparency and compliance communication.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security posture with HTTPS enforced and multiple security headers implemented, reducing common web vulnerabilities. Forms include CSRF tokens, indicating attention to input security. However, the absence of a publicly available security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency and may hinder trust from security-conscious clients. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. Compliance with GDPR is suggested by the presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms. The lack of a security.txt file or dedicated security contact points is a gap in incident response readiness. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be improved by publishing detailed security governance documents and establishing clear communication channels for security incidents.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a detailed security policy and incident response plan on the website to enhance transparency.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Provide contact information for a Data Protection Officer or security team to improve compliance and trust.
  4. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and integrations to mitigate supply chain risks.
  5. Enhance WHOIS data visibility or ensure domain registration information is consistent and publicly accessible.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Avigilon Corporation
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Avigilon
Description
Trusted by 100,000+ organizations globally. Experience comprehensive security solutions from Avigilon Unity (ACC & ACM) and Alta (formerly Openpath & Ava).
Key services
Security video surveillance, Access control systems, Integrated security platforms
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot Forms
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Security headers present
  • No exposed sensitive data detected
  • Secure forms with CSRF tokens

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
HubSpot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual for a .com domain.
  3. Strong privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms present.
  4. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  5. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
  6. Multiple external trusted domains used for analytics and consent management.
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  8. Content is business-focused on security technology solutions.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including JavaScript modules, CSS3, and HTML5, with HubSpot CMS integration and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices evident in meta tags and structured data. Performance is fast with asynchronous script loading and efficient resource management. The technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable digital presence. However, hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. There is an opportunity to improve technical transparency by publishing security headers details and domain registration information. Overall, the technical implementation supports the business goals effectively with minor areas for enhancement.
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 avigilon.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 avigilon.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.