Skip to main content

Security report for darkcubed.com

Celerium · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

82/100

Risk levelLow

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

Celerium is a cybersecurity company specializing in automated cyber defense solutions tailored for critical industries such as healthcare, defense contractors, state and local governments, and MSPs/MSSPs. Leveraging nearly two decades of experience, including support for the U.S. Department of Defense, Celerium offers SaaS products that enable early detection and containment of data breaches with minimal IT overhead. Their market position is that of a niche provider focused on pragmatic, easy-to-implement cybersecurity solutions, including no-cost programs for healthcare organizations to enhance PHI data breach defense. Technically, the website is built on HubSpot CMS and integrates multiple modern marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, and Chargebee for billing. Their SaaS solutions run on AWS cloud infrastructure, with plans for NIST 800-53 moderate compliance, indicating a commitment to recognized security frameworks. The website demonstrates good performance, mobile optimization, and accessibility, with comprehensive metadata and SEO practices. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS, employs standard security headers, and uses consent mechanisms for cookies, reflecting a mature security posture. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. However, the absence of explicit security policy pages, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests areas for improvement. Overall, the domain WHOIS data is unavailable, which slightly reduces trust but is not uncommon in cybersecurity firms. The website content, partnerships, and professional presentation strongly support legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security policies, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure to enhance transparency and trust.

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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  2. 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 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

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

Keep watching darkcubed.com

This scan found 16 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
75
Security headers
90
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
82

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

Celerium operates in a specialized cybersecurity niche, targeting organizations with critical data protection needs, especially in healthcare and defense sectors. Their business model revolves around SaaS delivery of automated threat detection and breach containment solutions, with a focus on ease of deployment and minimal ongoing IT staffing. Partnerships with reputable organizations such as the American Hospital Association and AWS enhance their market credibility. The company appears to be medium-sized with a strong emphasis on automated, scalable cybersecurity solutions. Their no-cost program for healthcare organizations indicates a strategic approach to market penetration and community defense enhancement. The use of multiple marketing and analytics tools suggests active customer engagement and lead generation efforts.

Security posture

The website and associated services demonstrate a solid security posture with HTTPS enforcement, modern security headers, and use of secure cloud infrastructure (AWS). The planned NIST 800-53 moderate compliance for 2024 indicates alignment with recognized cybersecurity standards. The presence of cookie consent banners and privacy policy adherence reflects compliance with privacy regulations such as GDPR. However, the lack of explicit security policy documentation, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure channels represents a gap in transparency and readiness communication. No vulnerabilities or insecure practices were detected in the website content or scripts. Overall, the security posture is strong but could be enhanced by publishing more detailed security governance information.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page detailing security frameworks, controls, and compliance status.
  2. Provide clear incident response contact information and procedures on the website.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance contact information availability, including verified company emails and phone numbers for support and sales.
  5. Regularly review third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure minimal privacy impact and maintain GDPR compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Celerium
Description
Celerium engineers cyber defense, detection, and containment solutions that are easy to implement and manage with minimal IT effort. They support critical industries including healthcare, defense contractors, state and local government, and SMBs. They leverage 18 years of experience including supporting the U.S. Department of Defense.
Key services
Data Breach Defender™, Compromise Defender®, Network Defender®, No-Cost PHI Data Breach Defense Program for Healthcare
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HubSpot CMS, AWS Cloud (hosting SaaS solutions), Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Crazy Egg, Chargebee (billing), Zoominfo pixel
Frameworks
NIST 800-53 (planned compliance for 2024)
Platforms
AWS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of secure cookies and consent banners
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reputable third-party scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google DoubleClick
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Crazy Egg, Zoominfo
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Chargebee
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 no blocking detected.
  2. Strong focus on automated cybersecurity solutions for healthcare, defense, government, and MSP markets.
  3. Use of multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools with proper consent mechanisms.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main page; contact likely via forms or demo requests.
  5. No explicit terms of service or security policy pages found.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which is a minor trust concern but common in cybersecurity industry.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on HubSpot CMS, leveraging modern web technologies and integrates multiple third-party marketing, analytics, and billing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Crazy Egg, Zoominfo, and Chargebee. Hosting and SaaS solutions run on AWS cloud infrastructure, ensuring scalability and reliability. The site is mobile optimized, accessible, and SEO-friendly with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, with video content and animated GIFs used for engagement. No technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to improve technical documentation and security disclosures to enhance trust and compliance visibility.
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 darkcubed.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 darkcubed.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.