Skip to main content

Security report for institutionalpropertyadvisors.com

Institutional Property Advisors · Real Estate · United States

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Institutional Property Advisors (IPA), a division of Marcus & Millichap, operates as a leading commercial real estate services firm specializing in investment sales, capital markets, and market research across the United States and Canada. The website reflects a professional and well-branded digital presence targeting institutional investors and commercial real estate clients. The business model focuses on providing customized solutions for acquisition, disposition, and financing of commercial properties and portfolios. Technically, the website employs modern JavaScript libraries, Google Tag Manager for analytics, and reCAPTCHA for form security, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The site is mobile-optimized, accessible, and SEO-friendly, though some security headers are missing. Privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with active consent mechanisms. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses reCAPTCHA to protect forms, but lacks explicit security headers and published incident response or vulnerability disclosure information. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable anomaly, though the website's content and parent company association support its legitimacy. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved with additional headers and transparency. The overall risk assessment is moderate with recommendations to enhance security headers, publish incident response policies, and clarify domain registration details to improve trust and compliance posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

2 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 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 institutionalpropertyadvisors.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
100
Security headers
35
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
76

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 institutionalpropertyadvisors.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
10
Employees
0
Customers
10
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
10%

2 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 institutionalpropertyadvisors.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

IPA holds a strong market position as a specialized division within Marcus & Millichap, leveraging industry-leading technology and research to serve commercial real estate investors. Their business model centers on investment sales and capital markets advisory, targeting institutional clients in North America. The website's content and structure support a professional image with clear navigation and relevant services. The company benefits from a robust partnership ecosystem through its parent company, enhancing credibility and market reach. Growth indicators include active research publication and news updates, supported by social media engagement. Revenue streams likely derive from advisory fees and capital market transactions. Strategic observations suggest a focus on digital maturity and client engagement through content and analytics.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security maturity level with enforced HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms, and cookie consent management aligned with GDPR. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents a gap that could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a published incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy limits transparency and preparedness perception. Data protection practices appear adequate, but could be enhanced by publishing security policies and providing direct security contact channels. Overall, the security culture is moderate with room for improvement in compliance and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen web security.
  2. Publish an incident response policy and vulnerability disclosure program to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Clarify domain registration details and ensure WHOIS data is publicly available to enhance trustworthiness.
  4. Add direct company contact phone numbers and security contact emails on the website for improved communication.
  5. Regularly review and update privacy and cookie policies to maintain compliance with evolving regulations.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Institutional Property Advisors
Description
Institutional Property Advisors (IPA), a division of Marcus & Millichap, is a leading commercial real estate services firm specializing in investment sales, capital markets, and market research across the United States and Canada.
Key services
Commercial Real Estate Investment Sales, Capital Markets, Market Research
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, jQuery, RequireJS, Google Tag Manager, reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
score_bootstrap, score_ccf
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Cookie consent banner with consent management
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WAF or security blocking detected.
  3. WHOIS data is missing or domain not found in WHOIS database, which is unusual.
  4. Strong branding and association with Marcus & Millichap.
  5. Good privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  6. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found in HTML; contact likely via forms.
  7. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and Google Tag Manager for analytics.
  8. Security best practices partially implemented; missing some security headers.
  9. No visible vulnerability disclosure or incident response information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern JavaScript stack with RequireJS module loading and jQuery libraries. It uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking, and integrates Google reCAPTCHA for form security. The CMS appears to be Sitecore, inferred from the use of score_bootstrap and score_ccf modules. Performance is moderate with asynchronous script loading and optimized media assets. The site is mobile responsive and includes accessibility features such as skip navigation links and ARIA roles. Technical debt is minimal, but the absence of some security headers and incomplete WHOIS data represent risks. Opportunities exist to enhance security posture and improve domain registration transparency to reduce operational risks.
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 institutionalpropertyadvisors.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 institutionalpropertyadvisors.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.