Skip to main content

Security report for elliottlaw.com

Elliott & Associates · Real Estate · United States

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

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Elliott & Associates is a specialized law firm focused on assisting Illinois property owners in minimizing their property tax liabilities through a strategic 7-step appeal process. The firm targets commercial property owners, homeowners, hotel owners, and community associations, emphasizing significant tax savings and personalized plans. The website is professionally designed, leveraging WordPress with a PaperStreet theme and integrates marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics and HubSpot. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, despite the professional appearance and detailed content. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS implied but lacking explicit security headers and privacy policies. Contact is primarily through web forms without direct email or phone contacts visible. Overall, the site presents a credible business front but would benefit from improved transparency and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  3. 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 elliottlaw.com

This scan found 23 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
37
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
65

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 firm positions itself as a trusted property tax appeal specialist in Illinois with a long-standing history since 1994 and claims of over $300 million saved for clients. Its business model revolves around legal consulting and appeals services, targeting property owners seeking tax relief. The website content and testimonials support a moderate market position with clear service offerings. The use of modern web technologies and marketing tools indicates a digitally mature approach. However, the lack of visible direct contact details and missing WHOIS data could impact client trust and business credibility. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the website content.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and includes Google reCAPTCHA for form security, indicating basic security awareness. However, no security headers were detected, and there is no visible privacy or cookie policy, which are important for GDPR and general data protection compliance. The absence of incident response contacts or vulnerability disclosure policies further limits the security maturity. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the content. The site would benefit from implementing security best practices such as CSP, HSTS, and clear privacy documentation to enhance trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, and X-Frame-Options to enhance security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including email and phone numbers for business and security incident reporting.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS registration data to ensure domain legitimacy and transparency.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and forms for security vulnerabilities and ensure anti-CSRF protections.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Elliott & Associates
Description
Elliott & Associates is a law firm specializing in helping Illinois property owners minimize property taxes through a strategic 7-step process. They provide property tax appeal services and evaluations to commercial property owners, homeowners, hotel owners, and community associations.
Key services
Property tax appeal, Smart Property Tax Evaluation, Custom tax savings plans
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Google Analytics, Gravity Forms, HubSpot scripts
Frameworks
PaperStreet theme
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage implied by URL
  • Use of reCAPTCHA script for forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
HubSpot Analytics
Marketing tools
HubSpot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional legal services site focused on Illinois property tax appeals.
  2. No WHOIS registration data available, which is unusual for an active .com domain.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages detected.
  4. Contact is primarily via web forms; no explicit email or phone contact found in visible content.
  5. Uses common analytics and marketing tools like Google Analytics and HubSpot.
  6. No security headers detected in provided data; HTTPS usage assumed but not verified.
  7. Content is safe and suitable for general audiences.
  8. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the PaperStreet theme and incorporates common JavaScript libraries like jQuery. It uses Gravity Forms for data collection and integrates analytics via Google Analytics and HubSpot. The site loads multiple external scripts and fonts from Google Fonts and CDN providers. Performance is moderate with some asynchronous script loading. Mobile optimization appears good with responsive design elements. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured content. Hosting provider details are not evident from the content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a professional legal services website but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy features.
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 elliottlaw.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 elliottlaw.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.