Skip to main content

Security report for hphood.com

HP Hood LLC · Retail · United States

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

HP Hood LLC operates a well-established website promoting its dairy products brand, Hood®, with a history dating back to 1846. The website offers comprehensive product information, recipes, and store locator features targeting consumers in the United States. The site is professionally designed with consistent branding and good user experience, including mobile optimization and clear navigation. Technically, the site uses Microsoft IIS, Bootstrap, jQuery, and other modern frontend libraries, but lacks a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which is a critical security gap. Cookie consent is implemented via OneTrust, and Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking. Security posture is weak due to missing HTTPS and limited security headers, and no explicit security or incident response policies are found. Overall, the domain registration data aligns well with the business, indicating legitimacy. Strategic improvements in SSL/TLS deployment and security headers are recommended to enhance trust and 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

7 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

  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
    • 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 hphood.com

This scan found 18 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
20
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
46

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

HP Hood LLC holds a strong market position as a legacy dairy brand in the retail sector, offering a range of dairy products including milk, ice cream, cottage cheese, sour cream, cream, and eggnog. The business model focuses on manufacturing and retail distribution, supported by a consumer-facing website with product showcases and recipes to engage customers. The company maintains active social media channels and uses marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager and ShareThis. The website content and structure reflect a mature digital presence, though there is room for improvement in security and privacy compliance. No direct contact emails or phone numbers are provided, relying instead on contact forms and social media for customer engagement.

Security posture

The website currently lacks a valid SSL certificate and does not support HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. Security headers are minimal, with no HSTS, CSP, or other advanced protections enabled. Cookie security is partially addressed with secure and HttpOnly flags. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are publicly available, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The absence of TLS protocols and session resumption further weakens the security posture. These gaps present moderate to high risks, especially for user data protection and regulatory compliance. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS and enhancement of security headers is critical.

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 legacy protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  5. Publish clear security and incident response policies including vulnerability disclosure guidelines.
  6. Enhance privacy compliance by explicitly stating GDPR adherence and data retention policies.
  7. Provide direct contact information for security and general inquiries to improve trust.
  8. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to avoid vulnerabilities.
  9. Improve accessibility features to meet WCAG standards for broader user inclusivity.
  10. Monitor and optimize website performance metrics for faster load times.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Microsoft IIS 10.0 and uses a combination of Bootstrap, jQuery, FontAwesome, Slick Carousel, and Video.js for frontend functionality. Google Tag Manager and ShareThis are integrated for analytics and social sharing. The site is mobile responsive with good SEO meta tags and Open Graph data. However, the lack of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols is a significant technical deficiency. DNS records are properly configured with multiple authoritative name servers and Outlook-based mail exchange. No CMS is explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Performance data is unavailable, but the presence of multiple large images and scripts may impact load times. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires urgent security upgrades and performance tuning.
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 hphood.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 hphood.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.