Skip to main content

Security report for enterasys.com

Extreme Networks · Technology · United States

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Extreme Networks is a leading enterprise technology company specializing in AI-powered cloud networking solutions that simplify and secure IT infrastructure. The company holds a strong market position as a Gartner Magic Quadrant Leader for wired and wireless LAN infrastructure. Their key services include the Extreme Platform ONE™, network fabric, cloud-based network management, and comprehensive security solutions. The website demonstrates a high level of digital maturity with modern technologies, responsive design, and rich content tailored for enterprise IT professionals and partners. However, the security posture is weakened by the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS, which is a critical issue that must be addressed to ensure secure communications and trust. Privacy compliance is well managed with comprehensive policies and consent mechanisms in place. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-structured but requires immediate improvements in SSL/TLS configuration to enhance security.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

8 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 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

  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 enterasys.com

This scan found 17 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
35
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
45

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

Extreme Networks operates as an essential technology entity targeting large enterprises and IT professionals. Their business model focuses on providing integrated networking hardware, software, and cloud services with AI capabilities. The company benefits from a robust partner ecosystem and extensive customer base, as evidenced by numerous case studies and testimonials. Their market positioning as a leader in Gartner's Magic Quadrant underscores competitive advantages in innovation and service quality. The website content and structure support their business goals by offering detailed product information, resources, and partner engagement portals. The presence of multiple regional sites and localized content indicates a global reach. Strategic observations include a strong emphasis on AI-driven networking platforms and cloud management, aligning with current industry trends.

Security posture

The website's security posture is currently suboptimal due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of HTTPS support, exposing users to potential risks such as data interception and trust issues. While some security headers like HSTS are present, the overall SSL/TLS configuration is incomplete with no modern protocols or strong cipher suites enabled. No known vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, but the missing HTTPS is a critical vulnerability. There is no visible incident response or security policy information on the site. The use of secure cookies with HttpOnly and SameSite attributes is a positive practice. To improve, the company should prioritize obtaining and maintaining a valid SSL certificate, enabling TLS 1.2 or 1.3, and configuring strong cipher suites and OCSP stapling. These steps will significantly enhance the security and trustworthiness of the website.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable outdated protocols to improve security.
  3. Configure strong cipher suites and enable OCSP stapling for better certificate validation.
  4. Implement and publish a clear security policy and incident response information to enhance transparency.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to avoid vulnerabilities.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack including HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, jQuery, Bootstrap 4, and Swiper.js for interactive components. It uses Sitecore CMS hosted on Microsoft Azure, indicating a robust and scalable infrastructure. Performance is moderate with some optimizations possible. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. However, the lack of HTTPS and invalid SSL certificate is a significant technical risk. The site uses multiple third-party scripts for analytics, marketing, and user engagement, which are well integrated but require ongoing monitoring for security and privacy compliance.
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 enterasys.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 enterasys.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.