Skip to main content

Security report for data-crypt.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website 'Force24 Portal' appears to be a login portal for a service likely related to Force24, a company known for marketing automation solutions. The site is minimalistic with a focus on user authentication and integrates several third-party marketing and analytics tools such as Intercom, Microsoft Clarity, Appcues, Freshsuccess, and Datadog. However, there is a lack of publicly available business descriptive content, contact information, and legal policies such as privacy or cookie policies, which limits transparency and user trust. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript frameworks and analytics platforms, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled but lacking advanced security headers and explicit security policies. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The WHOIS data for the domain platform.data-crypt.com is unavailable, with the raw WHOIS output indicating no match for the domain. This raises concerns about the domain's registration legitimacy or privacy protection usage. This lack of registration data negatively impacts the trustworthiness and business credibility scores. Overall, the site serves its purpose as a portal but lacks comprehensive business and privacy transparency. Strategic improvements in legal policy disclosures, contact availability, and security hardening are recommended 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

6 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  3. 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

    • 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 data-crypt.com

This scan found 24 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
0
Security headers
40
Email security
50
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
51

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

Force24 is likely targeting business users requiring access to a marketing automation platform or related services. The portal's design suggests a B2B SaaS model focusing on client login rather than public marketing. The integration of multiple marketing and analytics tools indicates an emphasis on user engagement and product experience optimization. However, the absence of public business information, contact details, and legal policies limits competitive intelligence and market positioning insights. The domain's questionable WHOIS data may reflect recent domain acquisition or privacy protection, which should be monitored for legitimacy. No partner or subsidiary domains were identified, and no affiliate or advertising networks beyond marketing tools were detected.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, which is fundamental for secure communications. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or Strict-Transport-Security were detected in the provided data, which are important for mitigating common web attacks. The site uses secure third-party services for analytics and user engagement but lacks visible incident response or security policy disclosures. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were found in the HTML content. The absence of privacy and cookie policies and contact information for security incidents represents compliance gaps, especially under GDPR and similar regulations. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing security headers, publishing security policies, and providing incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against web attacks.
  2. Publish clear and accessible privacy and cookie policies with explicit consent mechanisms to comply with GDPR and improve user trust.
  3. Provide visible and verified contact information including support emails and phone numbers to facilitate user communication and incident reporting.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure transparency and legitimacy of the domain ownership.
  5. Enhance website accessibility and SEO optimization to improve user experience and search engine visibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
AngularJS, Appcues, Intercom, Microsoft Clarity, Google Maps API, Datadog RUM, Datadog Logs, Freshsuccess
Frameworks
AngularJS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • Uses HTTPS
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity, Datadog RUM, Datadog Logs
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Intercom, Microsoft Clarity, Appcues, Datadog
Marketing tools
Intercom, Appcues, Freshsuccess
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a login portal titled 'Force24 Portal' with minimal public content
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found or linked
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses visible
  4. Uses multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools
  5. No visible security headers or advanced security configurations detected
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, indicating potential domain registration issues
  7. No social media or external business-related links detected
  8. Website content is minimal and focused on authentication
  9. No business descriptive content or marketing information publicly available
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using AngularJS framework and integrates multiple third-party services such as Intercom for customer messaging, Microsoft Clarity for user behavior analytics, Appcues for user onboarding, Freshsuccess for customer success management, and Datadog for performance monitoring and logging. The site loads asynchronously many external scripts, which may impact initial load performance but allows modular functionality. The HTML structure is complex with extensive CSS for UI components, indicating a rich user interface. However, no CMS or hosting provider information was detected. Mobile optimization is basic, and accessibility features are minimal. SEO meta tags are present but sparse, limiting organic search performance. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from performance tuning and improved accessibility compliance.
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 data-crypt.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 data-crypt.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.