Skip to main content

Security report for delegate-group.com

Delegate Healthcare Solutions LLC · Healthcare · United States

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Delegate Healthcare Solutions LLC operates as a leading manufacturer of foodservice software tailored for communal catering environments such as healthcare facilities, educational institutions, and senior living communities. The company offers a comprehensive suite of software solutions including patient service, foodservice management, full-service catering, and key functionalities like enterprise resource planning and menu ordering systems. Their market position is strong, supported by partnerships with notable clients and a clear focus on delivering integrated, cloud-hosted, and mobile-optimized solutions. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks like Next.js and hosted on Vercel, with a CMS likely based on Strapi. While the site demonstrates excellent content quality, branding consistency, and user experience, it suffers from critical security shortcomings, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS protocols. Privacy compliance is addressed through Cookiebot, ensuring consent mechanisms are in place. Overall, the business presents a credible and professional front but must urgently address its SSL/TLS configuration to improve security posture and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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"

    • 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 delegate-group.com

This scan found 19 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
30
Email security
50
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
46

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

The company targets healthcare providers, contract catering services, educational and senior living sectors, offering specialized software solutions that optimize foodservice operations, reduce waste, and enhance patient and customer satisfaction. Their business model revolves around software development and service provision, with a medium-sized operational scale and a mature domain reflecting long-term market presence. The website showcases strong trust indicators including client logos, social media engagement, and detailed contact information. The company maintains a multi-regional presence with localized content and contact points. Strategic partnerships and a diverse product portfolio position Delegate as a competitive player in the foodservice software industry.

Security posture

The current security posture reveals significant vulnerabilities. The lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols expose users to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. Security headers are minimal, with only HSTS partially implemented without subdomain inclusion or preload status. No evidence of incident response policies or security certifications was found. Cookie consent is managed effectively, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues is critical to protect user data and maintain compliance with security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable and enforce modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) with strong cipher suites.
  3. Enhance security headers by including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  5. Develop and publish a formal security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Delegate Healthcare Solutions LLC
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages a modern tech stack with Next.js framework and React, hosted on Vercel, ensuring scalability and performance potential. Media assets are managed via Cloudinary, and Cookiebot is used for cookie consent management. Despite the modern infrastructure, performance metrics indicate slow loading times, possibly due to large image assets or lack of optimization. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices including meta tags and structured data. Technical debt is minimal, but the absence of SSL/TLS is a critical risk. Opportunities exist to improve performance and security configurations to enhance overall reliability and user trust.
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 delegate-group.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 delegate-group.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.