Skip to main content

Security report for medicalharbour.com

Medical Harbour · Healthcare · Brazil

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Medical Harbour is a Brazilian technology company specializing in medical imaging solutions, including software for radiology, teleradiology, and medical education. Their product portfolio includes advanced DICOM viewers, cloud PACS solutions, and educational tools such as virtual cadaver and anatomical atlases. The company targets hospitals, clinics, radiologists, and medical educators, positioning itself as a niche specialist in healthcare technology. The website is professionally designed, multilingual, and integrates modern marketing and analytics tools, although it suffers from slow performance and lacks a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical security concern. Despite strong email security policies like SPF and DMARC, the absence of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols significantly weakens the security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, Medical Harbour demonstrates a solid business presence with room for improvement in technical and security infrastructure.

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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching medicalharbour.com

This scan found 21 issues across 5 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
100
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
68

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

Medical Harbour operates in the healthcare technology sector with a focus on medical imaging and education. Their competitive advantage lies in offering a comprehensive suite of imaging and educational products tailored for medical professionals and institutions. The business model revolves around software product sales and cloud services, supported by customer service via Zendesk. The company maintains a multilingual website targeting Brazilian and international markets. Partnerships include integration with email and marketing platforms such as SendGrid and Pipz. Growth indicators include a diversified product line and active social media presence. Strategic observations suggest the need to enhance security infrastructure to maintain trust and comply with evolving regulations.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate but compromised by the lack of HTTPS and valid SSL certificates, exposing users to potential interception risks. The presence of SPF and DMARC records indicates good email security practices, reducing phishing risks. However, no explicit security policy or incident response information is publicly available, which may hinder transparency and readiness. The website uses reputable third-party services for marketing and analytics but should ensure these comply with privacy standards. The absence of vulnerability disclosure mechanisms and security.txt files limits the ability to report and manage security issues effectively. Overall, the security culture appears basic with critical gaps in transport security.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible on the website.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program and publish a security.txt file.
  6. Regularly audit third-party scripts and services for privacy and security compliance.
  7. Optimize website performance to reduce load times and improve user experience.
  8. Enhance accessibility features to meet recognized standards.
  9. Maintain and update privacy and cookie policies to reflect current regulations.
  10. Increase transparency by providing more detailed business and compliance information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the Divi theme, integrating multiple marketing and analytics tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust for cookie consent, and Zendesk for support. DNS is managed via Cloudflare, providing robust DNS performance but no DNSSEC or CAA records are configured. The site suffers from a lack of valid SSL certificates and does not support any TLS protocols, which is a significant technical and security deficiency. Performance is slow with a high page load time and large page size. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility is basic. SEO is well addressed with proper metadata and multilingual support. The technical stack is modern but requires urgent security upgrades and performance optimization to reduce technical debt and operational risks.
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 medicalharbour.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 medicalharbour.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.