Skip to main content

Security report for fintellix.com

Fintellix · Finance · India

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Fintellix is a medium-sized, India-based company specializing in regulatory reporting, risk management, and compliance solutions for financial institutions and regulators globally. The company offers a suite of platforms and solutions including data analytics, data curation, supervisory reporting, and credit risk management. Their clientele includes many of the world's largest banks, positioning them as a trusted provider in the RegTech space. The website reflects a mature business with a professional digital presence, leveraging WordPress and Elementor technologies, and integrating analytics tools such as Microsoft Clarity. Security posture is good with HTTPS enabled and no obvious vulnerabilities, though explicit security headers and incident response policies are not published. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but lacking a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the website is well-structured, content-rich, and trustworthy, supporting the company's market position and business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
33/ 100 · High
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

4 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 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

  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

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching fintellix.com

This scan found 16 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
80
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
33
Average
61

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention fintellix.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
39
Employees
0
Customers
17
Third parties
22
Weak passwords
5%

3 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for fintellix.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Fintellix operates in the financial technology sector, focusing on regulatory and supervisory technology solutions. Their business model is B2B, targeting regulators and regulated financial entities worldwide. The company leverages its 17+ years of experience and global presence to deliver scalable, cloud-first platforms and managed services. Their offerings include regulatory reporting, credit risk management, syndicate reporting, and supervisory solutions, supported by implementation, consultation, and managed services. The company demonstrates strong branding consistency and trust signals such as awards and recognitions. Their digital footprint includes active social media channels and a comprehensive website that supports lead generation and client engagement.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration, ensuring encrypted communications. However, it lacks explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No sensitive data or credentials are exposed in the HTML content. The use of reputable third-party scripts such as Microsoft Clarity is noted, but continuous monitoring for vulnerabilities in these dependencies is advised. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency in security governance. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced with additional headers and documented policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen web security.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance website accessibility features to meet WCAG standards and improve user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Fintellix
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Fintellix
Description
Fintellix operates at the intersection of regulators and regulated entities, providing cutting edge risk, regulatory, supervisory and data analytics solutions. Their clients include many of the 500 largest global banks.
Key services
Regulatory Reporting Solution, Credit Risk Solution, Syndicate Reporting Solution, Supervisory Reporting Solution, Implementation Services, Consultation Services, Managed Services
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, Elementor 3.18.2, Elementor Pro 3.18.1, jQuery 3.7.1, Swiper Carousel, FluentForm, Google Fonts (Manrope, Nunito), Microsoft Clarity
Frameworks
WordPress, Elementor
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and analytics scripts like Microsoft Clarity

Analytics and tracking

Services
Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich.
  2. Clear focus on regulatory technology solutions for financial institutions and regulators.
  3. Multiple platforms and solutions offered with detailed descriptions.
  4. Contact information is clearly provided including email, phone, and physical address.
  5. Social media presence on LinkedIn, Twitter, and YouTube.
  6. No cookie consent banner detected, which may be a compliance gap.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies found on the website.
  8. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  9. No signs of blocking or WAF challenges; full content accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with Elementor and Elementor Pro page builders, indicating a modern and flexible CMS infrastructure. It uses jQuery 3.7.1 and Swiper for interactive elements like carousels. Google Fonts (Manrope and Nunito) are used for typography, and Microsoft Clarity is integrated for user behavior analytics. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO practices including meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate, with room for optimization in loading speed. No hosting provider details are explicitly found in the HTML content. The technical setup supports a professional and scalable web presence suitable for a medium-sized enterprise.
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 fintellix.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 fintellix.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.