Skip to main content

Security report for cegid.com

Cegid · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Cegid is a prominent management software publisher specializing in cloud-based business management solutions tailored for companies and the public sector. The company emphasizes innovation through artificial intelligence and user experience enhancements, positioning itself as a leader in digital transformation with a large customer base of approximately 750,000. Their offerings span retail, human resources, finance, and tax management, delivered primarily via SaaS models. Technically, the website is built on WordPress and integrates modern marketing and analytics tools such as Marketo, Microsoft Clarity, and Google Tag Manager, supported by a consent management platform to ensure privacy compliance. The site demonstrates excellent design, mobile optimization, and SEO practices, providing a professional user experience. Security-wise, the site enforces HTTPS and uses reputable third-party scripts but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies, which could be improved. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable anomaly that slightly impacts trust but does not overshadow the overall professionalism and legitimacy of the business. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing incident response information, and clarifying domain registration details to bolster trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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. 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  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 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching cegid.com

This scan found 17 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
0
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
66

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

Cegid holds a strong market position as a cloud leader in business management software, serving a broad range of industries with a focus on retail and human resources. Their business model centers on SaaS delivery, leveraging AI to differentiate their offerings. The company maintains a robust partnership ecosystem, including partner portals and innovation stores, supporting channel partners and customers globally. Their digital presence is multilingual and regionally targeted, indicating a global reach. Testimonials from notable clients and industry rankings reinforce their credibility. Revenue streams likely include software subscriptions, professional services, and partner programs. Growth indicators include continuous innovation in AI and cloud services, as well as active engagement in events and resources. The company’s operations reflect a mature, enterprise-grade software provider with a focus on customer success and digital transformation.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with mandatory HTTPS and use of consent management for cookies, aligning with GDPR requirements. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options represents an area for improvement. No direct evidence of vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data was found in the content. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency and readiness perception. The use of multiple third-party marketing and analytics scripts necessitates ongoing security audits to mitigate supply chain risks. Overall, the security maturity is adequate for a public-facing corporate site but could be enhanced by adopting additional best practices and publishing security governance information.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options headers to strengthen browser security.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
  4. Clarify domain WHOIS registration details to resolve inconsistencies and enhance legitimacy perception.
  5. Consider establishing a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to engage with security researchers.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Cegid
Description
Cegid offers cloud business management solutions adapted to the needs of companies and the public sector to improve performance.
Key services
Retail management solutions, Human Resources management, Finance and Tax management, Artificial Intelligence integration, Cloud infrastructure and SaaS solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Marketo, Microsoft Clarity, Consent Manager, Kameleoon A/B testing
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Cloud hosting (unspecified provider)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Consent management for cookies
  • Use of reputable third-party analytics and marketing tools

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Google Analytics (via GTM), Marketo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
AppNexus (acdn.adnxs.com), Microsoft Advertising (bat.bing.com)
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Marketo Munchkin
Marketing tools
Marketo, Consent Manager, Kameleoon
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. Strong focus on cloud-based business management solutions and AI integration.
  3. Multiple language versions and regional targeting evident.
  4. Use of modern marketing and analytics tools with consent management.
  5. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via form only.
  6. WHOIS data missing, which is unusual for a large enterprise domain.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  8. Good SEO and accessibility practices observed.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, leveraging a modern tech stack including JavaScript frameworks and multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools such as Marketo, Microsoft Clarity, and Google Tag Manager. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and accessibility, with excellent SEO metadata and structured data (JSON-LD) for enhanced search engine understanding. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by numerous external scripts and tracking pixels. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. The site uses consent management to comply with privacy regulations. Technical risks include potential performance impacts from multiple third-party scripts and the absence of some security headers. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations and improve transparency around domain registration and security governance.
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 cegid.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 cegid.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.