Skip to main content

Security report for hyatt.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.hyatt.com appears to be protected by security mechanisms that block access to its full content, as evidenced by the minimal HTML content containing only scripts and empty iframes. The WHOIS lookup for the domain returned no match, indicating either privacy protection or registry restrictions that prevent disclosure of registrar and registrant information. Due to these limitations, a comprehensive analysis of the website's business, technical, and security posture is not feasible. The domain name corresponds to a well-known global hospitality brand, but the lack of accessible data and WHOIS transparency reduces the ability to verify legitimacy and compliance. The website's security posture cannot be fully assessed, but the absence of visible security headers or policies suggests room for improvement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

7 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 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

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

Keep watching hyatt.com

This scan found 19 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
62
Security headers
30
Email security
82
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
69

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 hyatt.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
56,613
Employees
29
Customers
54,230
Third parties
2,354
Weak passwords
10%

Latest record dated 2026-06-13 · 465 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 hyatt.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –hotelreports.hyatt.com2026-06-13
  • –hotelreports.hyatt.com2026-05-28
  • –careers.hyatt.com2026-05-26
  • –careers.hyatt.com2026-05-26
  • –careers.hyatt.com2026-05-25

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

Due to the absence of accessible content and metadata, no detailed business intelligence could be extracted. The domain name suggests association with a major hospitality company, likely targeting travelers and customers seeking hotel accommodations and related services. No information about market positioning, partnerships, or business model could be confirmed from the provided data.

Security posture

The security posture assessment is limited by the lack of accessible content and metadata. No security headers or policies were detected, and the WHOIS data is unavailable, which may indicate privacy protection or registry restrictions. The presence of a minimal script and empty iframes suggests possible use of security or anti-bot measures. No vulnerabilities or incident response information could be identified. Overall, the security posture appears basic with significant unknowns.

Recommendations

  1. Engage with the domain registrar or hosting provider to enable WHOIS transparency or provide verified registrant information to improve trust.
  2. Ensure the website serves full content without blocking legitimate security scanners to enable proper analysis and indexing.
  3. Implement and publicly disclose privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to demonstrate compliance and transparency.
  4. Add security headers and validate SSL/TLS configuration to enhance security posture.
  5. Provide clear contact information and business details on the website to improve credibility and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Minimal HTML content with only scripts and iframes, no visible website content; WHOIS query returned no match indicating possible privacy or blocking; likely WAF or security challenge blocking full content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Performance
slow
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is minimal and likely blocked by WAF or security mechanisms
  2. No metadata, forms, or contact information found in provided HTML
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected
  4. No scripts or technologies clearly identified beyond a single custom script
  5. WHOIS data unavailable, indicating privacy or registry restrictions
  6. No external links except self-referential domain
  7. No social media or contact details present
  8. Website inaccessible for full content analysis
Technical notes

Notes

The technical infrastructure appears minimal with only a single custom JavaScript file loaded and no metadata or structured data present. The absence of CMS or known frameworks suggests a custom or heavily restricted environment. Performance and accessibility cannot be assessed due to lack of content. The website likely employs security or anti-bot measures that restrict content delivery, impacting SEO and user experience. Modernization opportunities include adding structured data, improving metadata, and enhancing accessibility and mobile optimization.
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. 70/100Medium28 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with hyatt.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 hyatt.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.