Skip to main content

Security report for glacier.co.za

Glacier Financial Solutions (PTY) LTD · Finance · South Africa

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Glacier by Sanlam is a South African licensed financial services provider specializing in wealth management and investment solutions, including unit trusts, retirement products, and financial planning. The website serves as a comprehensive portal for personal and business clients, offering detailed product information and access to intermediary and client login portals. The business is positioned as a significant player within the Sanlam group, leveraging its brand and resources to serve a broad market segment. Technically, the website is built on Microsoft SharePoint with integration of common web technologies such as jQuery and Google Tag Manager, indicating a mature but somewhat traditional digital infrastructure. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS severely undermines the site's security posture, exposing users to risks and impacting trust. Security headers are partially implemented, but critical modern security practices like HSTS and TLS are missing. Privacy and terms of service policies are linked to the parent Sanlam domain, suggesting centralized compliance management, though explicit cookie consent mechanisms are lacking. Overall, the site is professionally designed with good content quality and navigation but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and maintain regulatory compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

5 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

  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 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

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

Keep watching glacier.co.za

This scan found 15 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
65
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
53

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 glacier.co.za, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
10
Employees
0
Customers
0
Third parties
10
Weak passwords
20%

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 glacier.co.za.

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

Glacier by Sanlam operates within the finance sector, focusing on wealth management and retirement solutions for individuals and businesses. Its business model includes direct client services and intermediary partnerships, supported by a robust product portfolio including investments, retirement annuities, and financial planning services. The company benefits from its affiliation with Sanlam, a large financial services group, enhancing its market credibility and reach. The website reflects a well-structured content hierarchy targeting both personal and business clients, with dedicated sections for media, legal notices, and corporate governance. The presence of multiple language contact options and social media channels indicates a customer-centric approach. The domain and DNS configurations align with the business's South African operations, and the use of Mimecast for email security suggests attention to communication security. However, the lack of modern SSL/TLS implementation and cookie consent mechanisms may affect customer trust and regulatory adherence.

Security posture

The website's security posture is currently weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS support, which is a critical vulnerability for any financial services website. While some security headers such as X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-XSS-Protection are present, the lack of TLS protocols, HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption indicates outdated or incomplete security configurations. No explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are found on the site, limiting transparency and preparedness for security incidents. The use of Mimecast for email MX records is a positive indicator for email security. Overall, the site requires immediate remediation to implement HTTPS and enhance security controls to protect sensitive financial and personal data.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation checking performance and security.
  5. Add explicit cookie consent mechanisms to comply with privacy regulations and improve user trust.
  6. Publish clear security policies and incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
  7. Regularly audit and update security headers and web application configurations.
  8. Improve accessibility features to meet modern standards and enhance user experience.
  9. Optimize website performance metrics and monitor load times for better responsiveness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Microsoft SharePoint, leveraging its CMS and web part infrastructure. It uses jQuery and Modernizr for frontend scripting and feature detection, and integrates Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. The site includes custom scripts for carousel and event calendar functionality, and uses SPServices for SharePoint list data retrieval. DNS records indicate use of Mimecast for email security, but hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. Performance data is missing, suggesting potential monitoring gaps. Mobile optimization is good, with responsive CSS and device-specific content. Accessibility is basic, with some skip links and accessibility toggles present. SEO is basic with meta descriptions and canonical links but no structured data like JSON-LD detected. The absence of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols is a significant technical risk. Overall, the infrastructure is stable but requires modernization and security enhancements.
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 glacier.co.za. 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 glacier.co.za.

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.