Skip to main content

Security report for bpce.com

Bridgers & Paxton Consulting Engineers, Inc. · Energy · United States

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Bridgers & Paxton Consulting Engineers, Inc. is a well-established engineering consulting firm specializing in mechanical, electrical, plumbing, technology, and energy engineering services primarily for government and commercial projects. With a history dating back to 1951, the company emphasizes sustainable design and innovative engineering solutions, positioning itself as a trusted partner in the energy and government sectors. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, targeting government agencies and commercial clients seeking advanced engineering expertise. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using the Cornerstone theme framework, incorporating modern web technologies such as jQuery, Google Analytics, and Typekit fonts. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices, though performance is moderate. Security-wise, the site uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, indicating room for improvement in compliance and security posture. The security posture is moderate with no critical vulnerabilities detected in the visible content, but the absence of WHOIS data for the domain www.bpce.com raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy. The site does not display privacy or cookie policies, nor incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which are important for compliance and trust. Overall, Bridgers & Paxton presents a credible and professional online presence with strong business credibility but should address privacy, security headers, and domain registration transparency to enhance trust and compliance.

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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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
    • 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

  2. 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 bpce.com

This scan found 28 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. See sample alerts.

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
32
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
53

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

Bridgers & Paxton operates in the engineering consulting market with a focus on MEP and energy sustainability services for government and commercial clients. Their competitive advantage lies in their long history, government project experience, and commitment to sustainable design. The business model is service-based consulting with revenue streams from engineering projects and technology consulting. Target customers include government agencies, healthcare facilities, and commercial developers. The company maintains a partnership ecosystem evident through social media and project collaborations. Growth indicators include signing sustainability challenges and showcasing advanced projects like microgrid resiliency. Strategic observations suggest a focus on innovation and sustainability to differentiate in a competitive market.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and no exposed sensitive data in the HTML. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security posture. There are no visible compliance indicators for GDPR or incident response readiness. The absence of vulnerability disclosure or security contact information suggests limited transparency in security practices. While no critical vulnerabilities are apparent, the missing WHOIS data for the domain is a concern for trustworthiness. The security culture appears basic, with opportunities to improve compliance and user trust through enhanced policies and disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  3. Verify and publish domain registration details to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Establish and publicize incident response and vulnerability disclosure procedures.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Bridgers & Paxton Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bridgers & Paxton Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Description
B&P provides high quality mechanical, electrical, plumbing, technology and energy engineering services to government and commercial projects, pioneering cutting-edge technology and sustainable design.
Key services
Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Plumbing Engineering, Instrumentation & Controls Engineering, Building Information Modeling, Technology Consulting, Energy & Sustainability
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Analytics, Typekit Fonts, FontAwesome
Frameworks
Cornerstone (WordPress theme framework)
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional engineering consulting firm site with detailed service offerings.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found on homepage content.
  3. Contact information includes physical addresses and phone numbers in footer.
  4. Social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn.
  5. Uses WordPress CMS with Cornerstone theme and common plugins.
  6. No visible security headers detected in HTML source.
  7. WHOIS data for domain is missing, raising questions about domain registration status.
  8. No forms with visible email fields on homepage; contact form likely on linked pages.
  9. No explicit GDPR or data protection officer information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is based on WordPress CMS with the Cornerstone theme framework, utilizing modern web technologies such as jQuery, Google Analytics, and Typekit fonts. The site shows good mobile responsiveness and SEO optimization but moderate performance likely due to multiple CSS and JS assets. There is no indication of hosting provider from the HTML source. Technical debt appears low with a clean and structured codebase, but the absence of security headers and privacy mechanisms indicates areas for modernization. Opportunities exist to improve performance and security configurations to reduce risks and enhance operational stability.
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 bpce.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 bpce.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.