Skip to main content

Security report for interactivevisits.ca

Tech-Access Canada · Technology · Canada

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Tech-Access Canada operates a government/non-profit program called Interactive Visits, aimed at supporting Canadian technology companies through funding and advisory services. The website provides a waitlist registration form for the program, which is currently closed until April 1, 2026. The organization targets Canadian businesses seeking technology access and innovation support. The website is professionally designed with consistent branding and clear navigation, focusing on program information and contact facilitation. The technical infrastructure leverages modern web technologies including jQuery, Kendo UI, Bootstrap 4, and Google reCAPTCHA v3 for spam protection. The site is mobile optimized and performs moderately well, though accessibility and SEO features are basic. Security practices include HTTPS enforcement and anti-forgery tokens, but lack advanced security headers and DNSSEC. Security posture is adequate for the site's purpose, with no critical vulnerabilities detected. However, improvements such as enabling DNSSEC, adding security headers, and publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy would enhance security maturity. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of explicit privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the website is trustworthy and credible, serving a clear government/non-profit function with minimal risk. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance and security hardening are recommended to align with best practices and regulatory expectations.

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

6 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';…

  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 interactivevisits.ca

This scan found 23 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
65

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

Tech-Access Canada occupies a niche position as a government/non-profit entity facilitating technology access programs in Canada. Its business model centers on program funding allocation and client advisory services, targeting technology companies and stakeholders. The organization demonstrates stable operations since 2016, with a medium-sized footprint and consistent branding. The website reflects a focused service offering without commercial advertising or affiliate marketing. Partnerships appear limited to related government or program domains. Growth indicators are not explicit but the structured waitlist and funding cycles suggest ongoing program demand.

Security posture

The website exhibits a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and Google reCAPTCHA integration to mitigate spam. Anti-forgery tokens protect form submissions. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are published, indicating gaps in transparency and readiness. Data protection practices are basic, with no visible privacy policy or GDPR compliance statements. The security posture is sufficient for low-risk informational services but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance standards and protect user data effectively.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR and privacy compliance.
  4. Establish and publicize a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Conduct regular security audits of third-party libraries and update them to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Tech-Access Canada
Description
Tech-Access Canada operates the Interactive Visits program, providing technology access and support to Canadian companies. The site facilitates waitlist registration for the program, which is currently closed until April 1, 2026. The organization appears to be a government or non-profit entity focused on technology access and innovation support.
Key services
Interactive Visits program, Funding allocation for technology projects, Client engagement and advisory services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Kendo UI, Bootstrap 4, Google reCAPTCHA v3
Frameworks
Kendo UI Wizard, Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 for form spam protection
  • Anti-forgery token in forms

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found on the page
  3. Contact information is limited to an email and a form; no phone or physical address found
  4. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and frameworks for UI
  5. Security practices are basic but include HTTPS and reCAPTCHA
  6. No visible SEO or accessibility advanced features
  7. Content is focused on a government/non-profit program waitlist
  8. No advertising or tracking beyond reCAPTCHA detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end stack with jQuery, Kendo UI, and Bootstrap 4, providing a responsive and interactive user experience. Google reCAPTCHA v3 is integrated for bot mitigation. The site uses anti-forgery tokens for form security. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected. However, the lack of advanced SEO meta tags and accessibility features limits discoverability and inclusiveness. No CMS or hosting provider information is evident. The technical debt appears low but opportunities exist to enhance security headers and privacy compliance mechanisms.
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 interactivevisits.ca. 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 interactivevisits.ca.

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.