Skip to main content

Security report for it-solutions.com.mx

IT Services and Solutions, S. A. de C. V. · Technology · Mexico

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

IT Services and Solutions, S. A. de C. V., operating under the brand IT Solutions, is a Mexican technology company specializing in designing and implementing IT solutions to enhance business operations. Their offerings include infrastructure modernization, cybersecurity, digital transformation, cloud services, and support. The company targets businesses seeking comprehensive IT solutions and positions itself as a trusted partner with strong vendor alliances and professional services expertise. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with common plugins and sliders, but lacks a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support which is a critical security gap. The site includes contact forms with reCAPTCHA and social media links but lacks cookie consent mechanisms and detailed privacy compliance features. Security headers are minimal, and no incident response or security policies are publicly disclosed. Overall, the website presents a professional business image but requires urgent improvements in security posture and privacy compliance to meet modern standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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. 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 it-solutions.com.mx

This scan found 20 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
40

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

The company operates in the technology sector with a medium-sized business profile focused on B2B services. Their market positioning is strengthened by partnerships with leading technology vendors and a portfolio of integrated IT solutions. The business model revolves around consulting, solution design, implementation, and ongoing support. The website content and structure support clear communication of services and company values, with testimonials and trust signals present. However, the lack of explicit email contacts and limited privacy disclosures may affect lead capture and compliance. The partnership with it-solutionssa.com.mx suggests a broader ecosystem or related entity. Growth indicators include active news updates and a range of service offerings aligned with current IT trends.

Security posture

The security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, exposing users to potential interception and trust issues. While no critical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE are detected, the lack of HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption reduces security robustness. Security headers are minimal, and no dedicated security or incident response policies are published, indicating limited transparency and preparedness. Forms are protected by Google reCAPTCHA, mitigating spam risks. Overall, the site requires immediate SSL implementation and enhanced security controls to protect data and improve trustworthiness.

Recommendations

  1. Install and configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to enforce secure connections.
  3. Add comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish clear privacy, security, and incident response policies to improve compliance and transparency.
  5. Introduce a cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations and inform users.
  6. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  7. Enable OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  8. Consider adding structured data (JSON-LD) and Open Graph tags to enhance SEO and social sharing.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.3.18 using WPBakery Page Builder, Slider Revolution, LayerSlider, and Owl Carousel for UI components. It uses Google Fonts and Font Awesome for typography and icons. The site loads resources from multiple external domains including maxcdn.bootstrapcdn.com and fonts.googleapis.com. Performance metrics are missing, but chunked transfer encoding and lack of caching headers suggest moderate to slow loading. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design and viewport meta tags. Accessibility is basic with some semantic HTML but no ARIA landmarks detected. SEO is basic with meta description and canonical tags but no advanced structured data. Hosting provider is not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical stack is standard but requires modernization and 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 it-solutions.com.mx. 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 it-solutions.com.mx.

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.