Skip to main content

Security report for insent.ai

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.zoominfo.com/chat is currently inaccessible due to a bot mitigation security challenge implemented by PerimeterX. This challenge blocks automated access and requires human verification before content can be viewed. As a result, no substantive website content, metadata, or business information is available for analysis. The domain WHOIS data is also unavailable, with the registry returning a 'No match for domain' response, which limits the ability to verify domain registration details and legitimacy. The visible page only contains a CAPTCHA challenge interface with no contact information, privacy policies, or business descriptions. This indicates a strong security posture against automated threats but prevents comprehensive external analysis. From a technical perspective, the site uses PerimeterX for bot mitigation and includes Google Fonts for styling. No CMS or hosting provider information is discernible. The lack of accessible content and metadata results in poor scores for content quality, technical implementation, security posture, privacy compliance, and business credibility. Security-wise, the presence of a WAF challenge is a positive indicator of proactive defense against bots and scraping but also limits transparency. The absence of visible security headers or policies and the lack of WHOIS data reduce trustworthiness. Overall, the site is secure against automated threats but currently inaccessible for detailed external review. Strategically, the site owners should consider providing accessible security and privacy information post-verification and ensure WHOIS data is properly published to enhance trust and compliance visibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

9 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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching insent.ai

This scan found 22 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
87
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
63

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

Due to the blocked content, no direct business intelligence data could be extracted. The domain www.zoominfo.com is known in the industry as a provider of business intelligence and contact data services, targeting sales, marketing, and recruiting professionals. However, this specific URL /chat is inaccessible and does not reveal business model details, partnerships, or market positioning. No contact or policy information is available to assess customer engagement or compliance maturity. The use of PerimeterX suggests a focus on protecting intellectual property and data from automated scraping, which aligns with a data-driven business model. Without accessible content, no further insights on revenue streams, customer segments, or growth indicators can be confirmed.

Security posture

The security posture is characterized by the deployment of PerimeterX, a sophisticated bot mitigation solution, indicating a high level of defense against automated threats. However, the lack of accessible content prevents verification of other security best practices such as HTTPS enforcement, security headers, or secure form handling. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The absence of WHOIS data and registrant information reduces transparency and trust. Overall, the site demonstrates strong perimeter defense but lacks visible internal security and compliance disclosures. This limits external confidence in data protection and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Ensure WHOIS domain registration data is publicly available and accurate to improve trust.
  2. Provide accessible privacy, cookie, and security policies post-human verification to enhance compliance transparency.
  3. Implement and expose standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to improve security posture.
  4. Consider providing a security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Improve SEO and accessibility by allowing at least limited content access for indexing and compliance audits.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page is a bot mitigation challenge by PerimeterX indicating access is blocked until human verification is completed. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor

Technology

Stack
PerimeterX, JavaScript

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by a bot mitigation WAF (PerimeterX).
  2. No actual website content is accessible for analysis.
  3. No metadata, forms, or business information is available due to blocking.
  4. No contact information or policies are found on the page.
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable, limiting domain legitimacy assessment.
  6. Page requires human verification to proceed, indicating strong anti-bot measures.
Technical notes

Notes

The website employs PerimeterX for bot mitigation, which is a modern security technology to prevent automated scraping and abuse. The page includes Google Fonts for typography and uses JavaScript heavily for the CAPTCHA challenge. No CMS or hosting provider information is detectable from the blocked page. Performance and mobile optimization cannot be assessed due to lack of content. The site is served over HTTPS as implied by the URLs, but SSL configuration details are not available. The technical implementation focuses on security blocking rather than content delivery, resulting in minimal accessible data and poor SEO and user experience metrics.
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. 67/100 +1Medium28 findingsView report
  2. 66/100Medium26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with insent.ai. 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 insent.ai.

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.