Skip to main content

Security report for ehealthinsurance.com

Healthcare · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website ehealthinsurance.com is currently inaccessible due to a security block or Web Application Firewall (WAF) presenting an Access Denied page. This prevents any direct analysis of the website's content, metadata, or technical infrastructure. The domain is registered since 1998 with CSC Corporate Domains, Inc., indicating a mature and likely legitimate business presence in the healthcare insurance sector. However, the lack of accessible content limits the ability to assess the company's digital maturity, security posture, or privacy compliance. The security block suggests a protective measure to prevent unauthorized access or attacks, but it also restricts external analysis. From a technical perspective, no information about the technology stack, hosting, or performance can be derived. Similarly, no security headers, policies, or contact information are available for review. The WHOIS data is consistent and shows no privacy protection, which supports domain legitimacy. Overall, the site appears to be a large healthcare-related business with a long operational history, but the current security restrictions prevent a full evaluation. Security-wise, the presence of a WAF or similar mechanism is a positive indicator of protective measures, but the inability to verify security headers or policies is a limitation. No vulnerabilities or compliance gaps can be identified due to the blocked content. The overall risk assessment is constrained by the lack of data, and strategic recommendations focus on enabling secure but accessible information for external audits and transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

6 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. 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 ehealthinsurance.com

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. See sample alerts.

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
82
Security headers
25
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
71

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

eHealthInsurance.com operates in the healthcare sector, likely providing insurance products or services. The domain age and registrar information suggest a well-established entity. The business model probably revolves around online insurance marketplace services targeting consumers seeking health insurance plans. The lack of accessible content prevents detailed insights into revenue streams, partnerships, or growth indicators. No subsidiary or parent company information is available. The company likely targets a broad consumer base in the United States or similar markets. The absence of visible trust indicators or certifications on the blocked page limits competitive analysis.

Security posture

The website is protected by a security mechanism that blocks unauthorized access, indicating a proactive security posture. However, the absence of accessible content means no direct evaluation of security headers, SSL/TLS configuration, or vulnerability disclosures is possible. No incident response or data protection officer information is available. The WHOIS data shows no privacy protection, which is typical for established businesses. Overall, the security posture appears cautious but cannot be fully assessed. There is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerabilities from the provided data.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a secure but accessible mechanism to allow external security and compliance audits without compromising protection.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and security policies accessible to users and auditors to improve transparency and compliance.
  3. Ensure security headers and SSL/TLS configurations are properly implemented and publicly verifiable.
  4. Provide contact information for security incidents and data protection officers to enhance incident response readiness.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to foster responsible security reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Access Denied page detected with minimal HTML content and no site data, indicating a WAF or security block. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by a security mechanism or WAF, showing an Access Denied page.
  2. No metadata, scripts, forms, or business content available for analysis.
  3. WHOIS data indicates a long-established domain with no privacy protection.
  4. No contact information, policies, or security disclosures found due to blocked content.
  5. Unable to assess technical, security, or privacy compliance aspects accurately.
  6. Analysis incomplete due to WAF/security mechanisms. For accurate analysis, please contact guard@offseq.com
Technical notes

Notes

Due to the Access Denied page and lack of HTML content beyond a minimal error message, no technical stack, CMS, or hosting provider information can be extracted. The domain uses CSC Corporate Domains, Inc. as registrar and DNS is served by NS1 name servers. DNSSEC is not enabled. The lack of metadata, scripts, or structured data indicates the site is either down, restricted, or behind a strict WAF. Performance, mobile optimization, and SEO cannot be evaluated. The technical risk lies in the inability to verify proper configurations externally.
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 ehealthinsurance.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 ehealthinsurance.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.