Skip to main content

Security report for iocl.com

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. · Energy · India

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

80/100

Risk levelLow

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

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is a leading integrated energy company in India with a diversified portfolio spanning refining, marketing, pipelines, petrochemicals, natural gas, and alternative energy. The company maintains a strong market position supported by a large enterprise-scale operation and multiple subsidiaries. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive business information and official social media channels. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks like Bootstrap and is hosted with Cloudflare DNS, ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain transfer protection, but lacks advanced security headers and DNSSEC. Privacy compliance is weak due to absence of explicit privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but could improve in privacy and security transparency.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of iocl.com. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching iocl.com

This scan found 17 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
74
Security headers
80
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
80

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 iocl.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
924
Employees
0
Customers
880
Third parties
44
Weak passwords
0%

12 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 iocl.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Brand lookalikes

Add-on

Domains that imitate iocl.com and could be used for phishing or spoofed email, tracked in OffSeq Breach.

Tracked
73
Registered
73
Resolving
73
High or critical
0

Last checked 2026-06-20

Masked preview

  • io•••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • ho•••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • ik•••.comMediumbitsquatting

See the full lookalike list

A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of iocl.com with registration, mail-server, certificate and DNS signals.

Select it in the checkout above.

Lookalike data refreshes continuously. Monitoring on Breach alerts you when a variant is registered, gains a mail server or starts serving HTTPS.

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Indian Oil operates in the energy sector with a broad business model covering refining, marketing, pipeline transportation, petrochemicals, and natural gas distribution. Its target customers include motorists, households, businesses, investors, suppliers, and society. The company leverages a strong partnership and subsidiary ecosystem to extend its reach internationally. Revenue streams are diversified across fuel sales, LPG, petrochemicals, and consultancy services. The website content and structure indicate a focus on transparency and stakeholder engagement, with detailed annual reports and investor information. The company’s long domain age and consistent branding reinforce its market credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer protection. However, it lacks DNSSEC and visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web attacks. No explicit incident response or security policy information is published, and no dedicated security contact channels are found. The use of third-party tracking scripts like Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel introduces privacy considerations. Overall, the security posture is functional but could be enhanced by adopting best practices in headers, DNS security, and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to improve compliance.
  4. Provide clear security policy and incident response contact information to enhance trust and preparedness.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to minimize vulnerabilities and privacy risks.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Description
IndianOil is an integrated oil company in India and globally present in oil, gas, petrochemicals, and alternative energy sources.
Key services
Refining, Marketing of petroleum products, Pipeline transportation, Petrochemicals, Natural gas distribution, LPG services, Explosives and cryogenics, Consultancy and technology licensing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap, Font Awesome, jQuery (implied by usage of $ and plugins), Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status clientTransferProhibited

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Facebook SDK
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with extensive content about Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
  2. No explicit privacy or cookie policy found on the main site content provided.
  3. Multiple social media official links present.
  4. No direct email addresses or phone numbers explicitly labeled found in the provided HTML snippet.
  5. Forms present include a search form and links to grievance and contact portals.
  6. Security headers not explicitly visible in provided data; DNSSEC not enabled.
  7. Use of Google Tag Manager and Facebook Pixel for analytics and tracking.
  8. No WAF or blocking detected; site content fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design and Font Awesome for icons. Hosting is supported by Cloudflare DNS, which provides performance and security benefits. The site is mobile optimized and SEO friendly with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of analytics scripts. No CMS is explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in accessibility and security headers could enhance robustness. The site’s infrastructure supports a large enterprise with complex navigation and content requirements.
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. 80/100Low26 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with iocl.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 iocl.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.