Skip to main content

Security report for ethyca.com

Ethyca · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ethyca is a technology company specializing in providing trusted data infrastructure solutions for AI-driven enterprises. Their platform addresses the critical challenge of governing sensitive data access, use, and auditability at scale, offering modular products that cover governance taxonomy, data inventory, consent orchestration, automated data subject requests, and AI policy enforcement. Positioned as a leader in AI data governance, Ethyca targets enterprises requiring robust privacy compliance and data trust frameworks. The website demonstrates a high level of digital maturity, utilizing modern technologies such as Next.js, React, and integrating Google Tag Manager and reCAPTCHA for analytics and security. The security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling, though explicit security headers and incident response policies are not publicly documented. Overall, the website is professional, well-branded, and trustworthy, supported by notable customer logos and testimonials. However, the absence of public WHOIS data and cookie consent mechanisms slightly reduce the privacy compliance score.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

5 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 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

  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 ethyca.com

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
68

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

Ethyca operates in the technology sector with a focus on AI and data governance. Their business model is B2B SaaS, providing enterprises with tools to unify privacy and data governance across teams and tools. The company has established partnerships and a strong customer base including The New York Times, Mozilla, and WeTransfer, indicating solid market positioning. Their platform's modular approach allows clients to adopt components as needed, enhancing flexibility and scalability. The company emphasizes compliance with global privacy regulations such as GDPR and CCPA, which is critical for their target audience. Growth indicators include active content updates, research publications, and community engagement through open source projects. The partnership ecosystem includes trust and privacy centers under their domain, reinforcing their commitment to data privacy.

Security posture

Ethyca's website employs HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration, uses Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, and avoids exposing sensitive data in the HTML. While some standard security headers are not explicitly visible, the overall security practices are sound. The lack of a publicly available security policy or incident response contact reduces transparency in security governance. No vulnerabilities or outdated libraries were detected in the site content. The company demonstrates a mature security culture through integration of privacy tools and compliance frameworks, but could improve by publishing explicit security policies and enhancing cookie consent mechanisms to fully align with GDPR requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publicly document comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a detailed security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Consider making WHOIS registration information publicly available or clarifying privacy protection to enhance domain trustworthiness.
  5. Enhance data retention policy disclosures and privacy compliance documentation on the website.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ethyca
Description
Ethyca provides trusted data infrastructure for AI-driven enterprises, focusing on governing sensitive data access, use, and auditability at scale.
Key services
Governance taxonomy (Fides), Data inventory (Helios), Consent orchestration (Janus), Automated data subject requests (Lethe), AI policy enforcement (Astralis)
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, Google Tag Manager, Google reCAPTCHA, Fides.js (custom privacy consent library)
Frameworks
Next.js
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for form protection
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

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 rich content and no blocking mechanisms.
  2. Strong focus on AI data governance and privacy compliance.
  3. Multiple customer logos and testimonials enhance trust.
  4. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found; contact via form only.
  5. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected despite GDPR compliance claims.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, possibly due to privacy protection or domain registration issues.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React and Next.js framework, ensuring fast performance and excellent mobile optimization. It uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and integrates Google reCAPTCHA for form security. The site is custom-built without a standard CMS, indicating a tailored technical infrastructure. Performance is fast with optimized images and lazy loading. Accessibility features are present but could be further enhanced with explicit ARIA roles and landmarks. SEO is well implemented with meta tags, Open Graph, and Twitter card metadata. The technical stack is robust and supports the business goals effectively, though hosting provider details are not explicitly identified.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 68/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with ethyca.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 ethyca.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.