imation · Technology · South Korea
High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.
imation.com represents a technology-focused business specializing in storage solutions, positioning itself as a global leader in the storage industry with a focus on SSD products. The website primarily targets Korean-speaking users with language-based redirection to Korean subdomains, indicating a regional focus within a global market. The business model appears to be product and solution sales in the technology sector, with moderate company size inferred from the domain and content. The website content is minimal and primarily serves as a redirect hub rather than a full informational site. From a technical perspective, the site is hosted on an Apache server running an outdated PHP version 5.4.16, which poses security risks. The hosting IP suggests Amazon AWS infrastructure. The site lacks HTTPS support due to an invalid SSL certificate, which severely impacts security posture and user trust. Google Analytics is implemented for user tracking, but no privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating poor privacy compliance. Performance data is unavailable, but the minimal content and redirection scripts suggest slow or moderate loading times. Security evaluation reveals critical vulnerabilities including the absence of HTTPS, no HSTS, no DNSSEC, and no security headers beyond basic server headers. The lack of a valid SSL certificate and use of outdated PHP version expose the site to potential attacks. No incident response or security policies are publicly disclosed, and no contact information is provided for security or abuse reporting. These factors contribute to a low security score and overall risk to users and business reputation. Overall, the site exhibits significant gaps in security and privacy compliance, with minimal content and poor user experience. Strategic recommendations include immediate implementation of a valid SSL certificate, upgrading server software, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and enhancing security headers and DNS configurations to improve trust and compliance.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data
What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS
GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy
What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies
What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit
Detected services: Google Analytics
What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
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
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.
Forces HTTPS connections
What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
Controls resources the browser is allowed to load
What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.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.
€25per month
Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.
Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention imation.com, from OffSeq Breach.
8 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 imation.com.
Select it in the checkout above.
Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with imation.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review imation.com.