Skip to main content

Security report for ipf.ie

Irish Pensions and Finance · Finance · Ireland

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Irish Pensions and Finance (IPF) is a well-established financial advisory firm founded in 1993, specializing in pension and financial planning services for public sector employees in Ireland. The company has a strong market presence with over 30,000 clients and offers a range of services including income protection, life cover, savings and investments, mortgages, and a specialized Retirement Glidepath service. Their website reflects a professional and client-focused approach, targeting public sector workers such as healthcare staff, civil servants, county councils, and An Garda Síochána members. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern plugins and technologies such as jQuery, Swiper Slider, and GDPR compliance tools like Complianz. The site is mobile-optimized, SEO-friendly, and integrates analytics tools including Google Analytics and Jetpack Stats for user behavior tracking. Performance is moderate with good accessibility and responsive design. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks explicit security headers and a published security policy or incident response contacts. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The domain registration data is consistent with the business claims, enhancing trustworthiness. Overall, IPF's digital presence is strong, with excellent content quality, good technical implementation, and solid privacy compliance. Strategic improvements in security headers and transparency around security policies would further enhance their security posture and client trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
55/ 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

7 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      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

  3. 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';…

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

Keep watching ipf.ie

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. 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
55
Average
43

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

IPF holds a solid position in the Irish financial advisory market, focusing on public sector employees. Their competitive advantage lies in their specialized knowledge of public sector pensions and a broad client base. The business model revolves around personalized financial advice and pension management, generating revenue through advisory fees and product offerings. The company demonstrates growth through client testimonials and a comprehensive service portfolio. Partnerships with public sector bodies and a clear regulatory compliance framework underpin their operations. The website supports their market presence with rich content and client engagement features.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and GDPR-compliant cookie consent. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents an area for improvement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could be enhanced to demonstrate readiness and transparency. The use of reputable plugins and no visible vulnerabilities indicate a low risk of exploitation. Overall, the security maturity is good but could benefit from formalized policies and technical hardening.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to minimize risk from vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance user privacy by detailing data retention policies and providing more granular cookie consent options.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
IPF Irish Pensions and Finance Ltd t/a Irish Pensions and Finance
Registration number
468972
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Irish Pensions and Finance
Description
Better advice today for a brighter tomorrow
Key services
Financial planning advice, Pension management, Income protection, Life cover, Savings and investments, Mortgages, Retirement Glidepath service
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, PHP, jQuery 3.7.1, Swiper Slider, Formidable Forms plugin, Google Analytics (MonsterInsights), Complianz GDPR plugin, Jetpack Stats
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and privacy plugins (Complianz)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Jetpack Stats
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Jetpack Stats
Marketing tools
MonsterInsights Google Analytics plugin
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well maintained
  2. Clear focus on public sector financial advisory services
  3. Strong compliance with GDPR and cookie consent regulations
  4. Use of reputable third-party analytics and privacy plugins
  5. No visible security issues or blocking detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages a modern WordPress CMS with up-to-date plugins for SEO, analytics, and GDPR compliance. The tech stack includes jQuery, Swiper Slider, and Google Analytics integration via MonsterInsights. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with potential for improvement through optimization of scripts and assets. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit but the site uses standard WordPress infrastructure. Overall, the technical implementation supports business goals effectively with room for performance tuning.
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 ipf.ie. 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 ipf.ie.

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.