Skip to main content

Security report for marsh.com

Marsh · Finance · United Kingdom

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in SSL/TLS.

Security score

85/100

Risk levelLow

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

Marsh is a globally recognized leader in insurance broking and risk management, operating as a subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies. The website reflects a mature enterprise with a comprehensive service offering tailored to various industries worldwide. The digital infrastructure is built on Adobe Experience Manager, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries and consent management tools to ensure a professional user experience. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement and secure login mechanisms, though explicit security headers and published security policies are absent. Privacy compliance is partial, with no clear privacy or cookie policies detected in the provided content. Overall, the site demonstrates high professionalism and trustworthiness, but improvements in transparency and security documentation are recommended.

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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 marsh.com

This scan found 15 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
77
Security headers
80
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
85

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

Marsh operates in the finance sector, specifically in insurance broking and risk management, serving a global business audience. The company benefits from a strong market position as part of Marsh & McLennan Companies, with notable subsidiaries enhancing its service portfolio. The business model focuses on professional services with industry-specific expertise. The website supports this with detailed structured data, executive leadership information, and extensive regional presence. Partnerships and subsidiaries are clearly linked, reinforcing corporate credibility. Growth indicators include a large employee base and global reach. The digital presence aligns with corporate branding and supports client engagement through secure portals and contact mechanisms.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and secure form submission for user authentication, indicating a baseline of security best practices. Use of Osano for consent management and Google Tag Manager for analytics shows awareness of privacy and tracking concerns. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are published, which could hinder transparency and responsiveness to security incidents. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. The security score is good but could be improved with enhanced headers and published policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy accessible from the homepage.
  2. Add standard security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure program and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher compliance standards and improve user experience for all users.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Marsh
Description
Marsh is a global leader in insurance broking and risk management, bringing global, national, and industry-specific solutions.
Key services
Insurance broking, Risk management, Industry-specific solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, jQuery, Adobe Helix RUM, Google Tag Manager, Osano Consent Management
Frameworks
Adobe Experience Manager (AEM)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure login form with POST method
  • Use of consent management platform (Osano)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Adobe Helix RUM
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Adobe Helix RUM
Marketing tools
Osano Consent Management
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional corporate site for Marsh, a global insurance broker.
  2. Content is rich with structured data and social media presence.
  3. No WHOIS data available from raw output, possibly due to registry restrictions.
  4. No explicit privacy or cookie policy pages detected in provided content.
  5. Secure login form present with multi-factor authentication hints.
  6. Use of modern tracking and consent management tools.
  7. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  8. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Adobe Experience Manager, a robust enterprise CMS platform, and uses modern JavaScript libraries including jQuery and Adobe Helix RUM for performance monitoring. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing purposes, alongside Osano for cookie consent management. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices with proper meta tags and structured data. Performance is moderate, with potential for improvement in loading speed and accessibility compliance. The technical stack is modern and suitable for a large enterprise, but some technical debt may exist in legacy script usage and incomplete security header implementation.
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. 76/100Low18 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with marsh.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 marsh.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.