Skip to main content

Security report for medicalaid.ie

St. Paul's Garda Medical Aid Society · Healthcare · Ireland

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

St. Paul's Garda Medical Aid Society operates as a non-profit healthcare organization providing medical aid and insurance services primarily to Garda members in Ireland. The website serves as an informational portal offering benefit guides, claims login, and contact details. The business has a niche market position with a long history dating back to 1980, although domain registration details could not be verified due to missing WHOIS data. Technically, the website is built on legacy ASP.NET WebForms technology with basic JavaScript usage. The site lacks modern CMS or advanced frameworks and shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. There are no analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating minimal user tracking. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS (assumed but not confirmed), but lacks critical security headers and privacy compliance documentation such as privacy and cookie policies. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided. The absence of WHOIS data reduces trustworthiness, though the site content appears professional and focused on its target audience. Overall, the website is functional and provides essential services to its members but requires improvements in security posture, privacy compliance, and transparency to enhance trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

  2. 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 medicalaid.ie

This scan found 24 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
82
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
60

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 organization targets Garda members with specialized health insurance services, leveraging its historical legacy and niche positioning. The business model is non-profit, focusing on member benefits rather than commercial profit. The website supports member engagement through claims access and informational resources. Lack of external partnerships or social media presence limits broader market reach. The absence of detailed business registration data online suggests a need for improved digital transparency. Growth potential may be constrained by legacy technology and limited digital marketing efforts.

Security posture

The current security maturity is basic with significant gaps. The website lacks essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, increasing risk of common web attacks. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating non-compliance with GDPR requirements. The login form uses POST but lacks visible anti-CSRF tokens or multi-factor authentication. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are evident. The missing WHOIS data further reduces domain trust. Overall, the security posture requires urgent enhancements to protect member data and comply with regulations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with strong TLS configuration and verify SSL certificate validity.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  3. Deploy security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  4. Introduce anti-CSRF tokens and consider multi-factor authentication for login forms.
  5. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to improve transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Registration number
Reg No Password
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
St. Paul's Garda Medical Aid Society
Description
St. Paul's Garda Medical Aid Society provides health insurance services to its members, formed in 1980 from the amalgamation of Garda Siochana Medical Aid Society and St. Paul's Benefit Society Limited. The site offers information on benefits, claims records, forms, and contact details.
Key services
Health insurance coverage, Claims processing and records, Information on hospitals and consultants, Benefit guides and prescription services
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET WebForms, JavaScript
Frameworks
Microsoft ASP.NET
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS assumed but not confirmed
  • Secure form with POST method for login

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the homepage or sidebar.
  4. Site uses legacy ASP.NET WebForms technology indicating older infrastructure.
  5. No external links or social media profiles detected in the HTML content.
  6. Login form present for claims access with basic input fields.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. No security headers or advanced security features observed.
  9. Content is focused on a niche healthcare non-profit society for Garda members in Ireland.
  10. No WHOIS data available to confirm domain registration details.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on ASP.NET WebForms, indicating legacy infrastructure that may limit scalability and modernization. JavaScript usage is minimal and no modern frameworks or CMS platforms are detected. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with limited meta tags and no structured data or Open Graph tags. No analytics or tracking tools are integrated, which reduces data-driven insights but improves privacy. Technical debt is evident and modernization opportunities include migrating to a modern CMS and enhancing front-end responsiveness.
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 medicalaid.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 medicalaid.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.