Skip to main content

Security report for haemonetics.com

Haemonetics Corporation · Healthcare · United States

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Haemonetics Corporation operates a professional and content-rich website focused on delivering innovative medical technology solutions primarily for hospitals, plasma centers, and blood centers. The company positions itself as a leader in healthcare technology, targeting healthcare providers and institutions with B2B solutions that improve patient care and operational efficiency. The website is built on a modern CMS (Sitecore) and integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools, reflecting a mature digital infrastructure. However, the technical infrastructure shows critical security weaknesses, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which severely impact the security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms, but incident response and security policy disclosures are missing. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy in business presentation but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and maintain trust.

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

6 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

    • 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 haemonetics.com

This scan found 13 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
0
Security headers
85
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
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 haemonetics.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
153
Employees
31
Customers
83
Third parties
39
Weak passwords
8%

Latest record dated 2026-06-14 · 18 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 haemonetics.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –adfs.haemonetics.com2026-06-14
  • –adfs.haemonetics.com2026-06-08
  • –adfs.haemonetics.com2026-06-06
  • –adfs.haemonetics.com2026-06-06
  • –mail-eu.haemonetics.com2026-05-21

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Haemonetics maintains a strong market position in the healthcare technology sector, focusing on blood management and patient care solutions. Their business model is B2B, serving hospitals, plasma, and blood centers with specialized products and services. The company leverages a partner ecosystem including investor relations platforms and marketing tools like HubSpot and Adobe DTM. The website content and structure support clear communication of their offerings and corporate responsibility initiatives. Growth indicators include active news releases and career opportunities. The company’s digital presence is consistent with a large enterprise healthcare provider, although some modernization in security infrastructure is needed.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing the site to interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. Security headers such as HSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection are implemented, but HSTS is ineffective without HTTPS. No OCSP stapling or session resumption is enabled, reducing performance and security. The absence of incident response and security policy pages indicates a gap in transparency and preparedness. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms are well implemented, showing awareness of GDPR requirements. Overall, the site requires immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of security governance documentation.

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 and TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  4. Publish clear security policy and incident response information to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update security headers and Content Security Policy to maintain defense in depth.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Microsoft IIS 10.0 with ASP.NET and uses Sitecore CMS, indicating a robust enterprise-grade platform. Frontend technologies include jQuery, Bootstrap 4.5.2, and Brightcove for video content. Analytics and marketing integrations include Matomo, LinkedIn Insight Tag, HubSpot, Adobe DTM, and New Relic. The site is mobile optimized with responsive images and accessible navigation. However, performance metrics were not available, and SSL/TLS misconfiguration represents a critical technical risk. The DNS setup is standard with no DNSSEC or CAA records, and MX records point to Microsoft Outlook protection services. Overall, the technical stack is modern but requires urgent security upgrades to align with best practices.
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 haemonetics.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 haemonetics.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.