Skip to main content

Security report for ecix.net

Megaport · Technology · Australia

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Megaport is a leading provider of cloud networking and internet exchange services, offering solutions such as MegaIX to optimize traffic flow and reduce ISP costs. The company targets ISPs, enterprises, and cloud service providers with a B2B business model. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence with comprehensive service descriptions and a focus on technology and telecommunications sectors. Technically, the site employs modern web technologies including jQuery, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust for cookie consent, and Visual Website Optimizer for A/B testing, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement, multiple security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the website presents a trustworthy and professional image, although WHOIS data is unavailable, limiting domain registration verification.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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. 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';…

  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 ecix.net

This scan found 20 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
74

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

Megaport holds a strong market position as a global cloud networking provider, leveraging software-defined networking to offer scalable and flexible internet exchange solutions. Their business model focuses on enterprise and ISP customers, providing services that enhance network performance and reduce costs. The company demonstrates strategic use of analytics and marketing tools to optimize user engagement and conversion. The presence of ISO 27001 certification underscores their commitment to security standards. While direct contact details are not prominent on the analyzed page, they are likely available on dedicated contact pages, supporting customer engagement. The lack of WHOIS data is a minor concern but does not detract from the overall professional presentation and market credibility.

Security posture

The website exhibits a robust security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security, and no detected vulnerabilities in scripts or forms. The use of reputable third-party tools for analytics and consent management further enhances security and privacy compliance. However, the absence of a publicly available security policy or incident response information is a gap that could be addressed to improve transparency and readiness. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file was found, which is recommended for mature security practices. Overall, the site is secure and follows best practices, with room for improvement in explicit security communication.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to enhance transparency and trust.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential security risks.
  5. Provide clearer contact information for security and privacy inquiries to strengthen user confidence.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Megaport
Description
Megaport provides cloud networking solutions including MegaIX, an internet exchange service to optimize traffic flow and reduce ISP costs.
Key services
MegaIX internet exchange, Cloud connectivity, Network optimization
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust cookie consent, Segment analytics, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO), Plausible analytics
Frameworks
Hugo (static site generator)
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reputable third-party security and analytics tools

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Segment, Visual Website Optimizer, Plausible
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Segment, Visual Website Optimizer, Plausible
Marketing tools
OneTrust
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professionally presented and relevant to cloud networking and internet exchange services.
  3. Use of multiple reputable analytics and marketing tools with consent mechanisms.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the analyzed page; contact info likely on dedicated contact page.
  5. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain registration trust verification.
  6. Security headers and HTTPS configuration are strong.
  7. No evidence of adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a modern technology stack including jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust for cookie consent, Segment analytics, and Visual Website Optimizer for experimentation. It uses Hugo as a static site generator, contributing to fast performance and good mobile optimization. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. Hosting details are not explicitly identified but the site uses multiple CDN and analytics providers. The technical implementation supports a professional and scalable web presence with good performance metrics and user experience.
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 ecix.net. 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 ecix.net.

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.