Skip to main content

Security report for bayseal.com

Bay Seal Company · Manufacturing · United States

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 3 other checks.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Bay Seal Company is a well-established manufacturer and distributor of sealing products and gaskets based in Hayward, California, with a history dating back to 1957. The company offers a broad range of sealing solutions including O-rings, Kalrez products, custom molded shapes, and spring energized PTFE seals, serving diverse industrial sectors. Their business model focuses on providing high-quality products combined with engineering support, local inventory, and customer service. The website reflects a medium-sized enterprise with consistent branding and good content quality, targeting industrial customers requiring specialized sealing solutions. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Bootstrap and jQuery, leveraging Google Tag Manager and Analytics for tracking. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly, though performance is moderate. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and secure forms, but lacks advanced security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible privacy or cookie policies, which is a gap for GDPR and other regulations. The WHOIS data is missing, which raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy despite the active and professional website presence. This inconsistency should be addressed to improve trust. Overall, the site is professional and functional but would benefit from enhanced privacy, security policies, and WHOIS transparency to strengthen its security and compliance posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

10 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

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

Keep watching bayseal.com

This scan found 26 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
72
Security headers
20
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
47

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

Bay Seal Company operates in the manufacturing sector specializing in sealing products and gaskets. Their competitive advantage lies in their long-standing history, local inventory, and engineering support services. The business model combines manufacturing and distribution with value-added services such as failure analysis and prototyping. Revenue streams likely include product sales and engineering consulting. The target customers are industrial and manufacturing companies requiring sealing solutions. The company has a partnership ecosystem including recognized brands like Kalrez and Parker. Growth indicators include a second office in Texas and active participation in industry events. The website supports their market presence with detailed product information and contact channels.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and use of secure contact forms. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which could mitigate certain attack vectors. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is published, limiting transparency. Privacy compliance is weak with no visible privacy or cookie policies, which could expose the company to regulatory risks. No data protection officer contact or GDPR compliance statements are found. The absence of WHOIS data is a notable concern for domain legitimacy verification. Overall, the security posture is functional but requires improvements in policy transparency, header implementation, and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy on the website to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Provide clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to build trust and readiness.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure transparency and legitimacy.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them to latest secure versions.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Bay Seal Company
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bay Seal Company
Description
Bay Seal Company provides sealing products and services including application and design review, material selection, seal and profile design, problem solving, sampling and prototyping, failure analysis and recommendations. They maintain a large local inventory with will call counter and local delivery.
Key services
Sealing product sales, Application and design assistance, Sampling and prototyping, Failure analysis, Local delivery and will call
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap 4, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, FontAwesome, Yoast SEO
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Secure forms with Contact Form 7 plugin

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No privacy or cookie policy found on main site
  3. Contact information is clearly presented with multiple channels
  4. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  5. No visible security headers detected in provided data
  6. WHOIS data missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy verification
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using Bootstrap 4 for responsive design and jQuery for interactivity. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking user behavior. The site loads external fonts from Google Fonts and icons from FontAwesome. Performance is moderate with standard CDN usage for libraries. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). However, there is no evidence of advanced accessibility features beyond basic compliance. The absence of security headers and incomplete privacy compliance represent technical debt and modernization opportunities. Hosting provider details are not disclosed in the data.
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 bayseal.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 bayseal.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.