Skip to main content

Security report for battleface.com

battleface · Other · United States

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

battleface is a specialized travel insurance provider targeting adventure and unique travelers globally, offering single-trip, multi-trip, and corporate group travel insurance plans. The company emphasizes a service-oriented approach with 24/7 travel assistance and a fully digital claims process, positioning itself as a modern and customer-centric insurer. The website is built on WordPress with Elementor, leveraging modern web technologies and third-party integrations such as Stripe for payments and HelpScout for customer support. Security posture is strong with HTTPS, security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities, though the absence of a public security policy and incident response contact is noted. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. However, the WHOIS data for the domain is missing or unavailable, which raises some concerns about domain legitimacy and registration transparency. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and technically sound, but domain registration details should be verified further.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
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
    • 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 battleface.com

This scan found 18 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
90
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
78

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

battleface operates in the niche travel insurance market with a focus on adventure travelers and global availability. Its business model is direct-to-consumer with digital quoting and claims management. The company leverages partnerships for claims assistance and corporate travel plans. The presence of Trustpilot reviews and multiple contact channels supports credibility. The company appears medium-sized with consistent branding and a strong digital presence. The lack of WHOIS data is a potential risk factor but may be due to privacy protection or recent registration. The company targets customers in the US, UK, Europe, Australia, and Canada, indicating a broad international footprint.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, multiple security headers, and no exposed sensitive data. Use of third-party services like HelpScout and Stripe is standard and appears well integrated. However, the absence of a public security policy, vulnerability disclosure, and incident response contacts limits transparency. No critical vulnerabilities or outdated libraries were detected in the HTML content. Privacy compliance is strong with cookie consent and GDPR indicators. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved by publishing formal security and incident response documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.
  2. Implement a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Provide clear incident response contact information for security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
battleface
Description
battleface provides travel protection plans including single and multiple trip insurance coverage, travel assistance services, and claims support.
Key services
Single-trip travel insurance, Multi-trip annual insurance, Corporate group travel insurance, 24/7 travel assistance and claims
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Bootstrap, jQuery, Stripe.js, Google Tag Manager, HelpScout Beacon
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with CAPTCHA and consent

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Trustpilot widget
Marketing tools
HelpScout Beacon
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 WAF or security challenge blocking access
  3. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which reduces trust score
  4. Strong presence of trust signals such as Trustpilot reviews and 24/7 assistance
  5. Use of modern web technologies and CMS (WordPress + Elementor)
  6. Good privacy and cookie policy presence with consent mechanisms
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information found
  8. Multiple contact methods clearly presented including phone and email
  9. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected in HTML content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder, using Bootstrap for responsive design and jQuery for scripting. It integrates Stripe.js for payment processing and HelpScout Beacon for customer support chat. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking. The site loads efficiently with optimized images and responsive layouts. SEO is well implemented with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. Accessibility and mobile optimization are good, though some improvements are possible. The technical stack is modern and well maintained, supporting a professional and user-friendly experience.
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 battleface.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 battleface.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.