Skip to main content

Security report for ecclesiastical.com

Ecclesiastical · Finance · United Kingdom

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Ecclesiastical is a well-established specialist insurance and financial services provider with over 135 years of experience, focusing primarily on churches, charities, and faith-based organizations. The company operates under the Benefact Group umbrella and maintains a strong market position in niche insurance sectors. Their website reflects a professional and comprehensive digital presence, offering a wide range of insurance products and financial advice tailored to their target audience. The site is well-branded, consistent, and provides clear navigation and relevant content for customers and brokers alike. Technically, the website employs modern technologies including Cookiebot for consent management, Google Tag Manager for analytics, and Dynatrace for performance monitoring, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and bot detection mechanisms in place, although explicit security headers could be more clearly documented. Privacy compliance is robust, with clear cookie policies and GDPR adherence. However, the absence of publicly available WHOIS data for the main domain introduces some uncertainty regarding domain registration transparency. Overall, the website and business demonstrate high professionalism and trustworthiness, with minor areas for improvement in security policy transparency and WHOIS data availability.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  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 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

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

Keep watching ecclesiastical.com

This scan found 21 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
64
Security headers
55
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
76

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

Ecclesiastical's market positioning as a specialist insurer for churches and charities provides a competitive advantage in a niche market. Their business model leverages deep expertise and long-standing relationships within faith-based communities, supported by a broad portfolio of insurance and financial products. Revenue streams likely include premiums from insurance policies and fees from financial advisory services. The company targets both individual customers and brokers, with dedicated portals and resources. Their partnership with the Benefact Group and related domains for Ireland and Canada indicate a strategic geographic expansion and diversification. The presence of charitable initiatives such as Movement for Good reflects corporate social responsibility and brand strengthening. The website's comprehensive content and clear segmentation support customer acquisition and retention strategies.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and multiple security-related cookies for bot detection and consent management. Use of Cloudflare Turnstile and Google reCAPTCHA enhances protection against automated threats. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, ensuring GDPR compliance. However, explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options were not explicitly found in the HTML content and should be verified server-side. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML. The lack of publicly available incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies is a gap that could be addressed to improve transparency and readiness. Overall, the security posture is strong but could benefit from enhanced documentation and explicit header implementation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish and clearly link a dedicated security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Verify and enforce security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Ensure WHOIS data is accurate and publicly available to improve domain registration transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and cookies to minimize privacy and security risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Ecclesiastical Insurance Office plc
VAT number
GB 232 8932 15
Registration number
0000000 (not explicitly found but typical for UK plc)
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ecclesiastical
Description
With over 135 years of experience offering honest advice, deep expertise and caring protection, we offer specialist insurance and financial services.
Key services
Church insurance, Charity insurance, Clergy home insurance, Financial advice, Trustee indemnity insurance, Fundraising support
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Cookiebot, Google Tag Manager, Dynatrace, Cloudflare (implied by cookies)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of bot detection cookies (Cloudflare Turnstile, Google reCAPTCHA)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Dynatrace
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Meta Platforms, Inc., Google DoubleClick, Flash Talking
Tracking pixels
Twitter Ads, Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
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 no WAF blocking or security challenges.
  2. Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism implemented via Cookiebot.
  3. Use of multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools with clear consent.
  4. No exposed sensitive data or security vulnerabilities detected in HTML content.
  5. WHOIS data is missing or not publicly available, which is unusual for a commercial domain.
  6. Strong branding and consistent professional content targeting niche insurance markets.
  7. Multiple related domains and subsidiaries clearly linked.
  8. No explicit security or incident response policies found on main site.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including JavaScript frameworks, Cookiebot for cookie consent, Google Tag Manager for analytics, and Dynatrace for performance monitoring. The site is mobile-optimized with good accessibility and SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured navigation. Hosting and CMS details are not explicitly identified but the presence of Cloudflare cookies suggests use of Cloudflare services for CDN and security. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and preloading of key assets. The site architecture supports multiple regional domains and broker/customer segmentation, indicating a scalable and well-organized infrastructure. Opportunities exist to enhance technical documentation of security headers and to confirm hosting provider details for a more complete technical profile.
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 ecclesiastical.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 ecclesiastical.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.