Skip to main content

Security report for neoassist.com

NeoAssist · Technology · Brazil

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

NeoAssist is a Brazilian technology company offering a comprehensive omnichannel customer service platform that integrates multiple communication channels and leverages artificial intelligence to enhance customer experience and operational efficiency. The company is well-positioned in the market with a large client base of over 220 brands and a strong focus on data-driven insights and automation. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern SEO and analytics integrations, hosted on Cloudflare with robust SSL configurations. Security posture is good with proper SPF and DMARC records, TLS 1.3 support, and no critical vulnerabilities detected, though improvements in DNSSEC and HSTS are recommended. Privacy compliance is strong, featuring a comprehensive privacy policy, cookie consent mechanisms, and GDPR alignment. Overall, NeoAssist demonstrates a mature digital presence with professional design, extensive marketing and analytics tools, and a high level of trustworthiness.

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

8 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 neoassist.com

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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
63

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

NeoAssist operates in the technology sector, focusing on SaaS solutions for customer service automation and omnichannel communication. Their business model targets medium to large enterprises in Brazil, offering products such as Assist, Canais, Workflow, and AI-powered Nub.IA. The company leverages partnerships with marketing and consent management providers to ensure compliance and enhance customer engagement. Their market position is strengthened by a broad client portfolio and a consistent brand presence. Growth indicators include continuous content updates, active social media channels, and integration of advanced analytics and marketing tools. Strategic partnerships with service providers like Insany Design and Goadopt enhance their operational capabilities.

Security posture

NeoAssist maintains a solid security posture with HTTPS enforced via TLS 1.3 and 1.2, OCSP stapling enabled, and no known SSL vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed or Logjam. DNS records include SPF and DMARC with quarantine policies, reducing email spoofing risks. However, DNSSEC and CAA records are not implemented, representing potential areas for DNS security enhancement. The website does not enable HSTS, which could improve transport security. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analysis. The presence of multiple third-party scripts and marketing tools necessitates ongoing monitoring to mitigate supply chain risks. Incident response and security policy documentation were not found publicly, indicating an opportunity to improve transparency and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Enable HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to strengthen HTTPS enforcement.
  2. Implement DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance DNS security and certificate issuance control.
  3. Achieve certificate transparency compliance to improve trust and detect misissuance.
  4. Publish security policy and incident response procedures to increase transparency and preparedness.
  5. Optimize website performance by reducing load time and resource count for better user experience.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin, integrating multiple marketing and analytics tools including Google Analytics, HubSpot, Microsoft Clarity, and Hotjar. Hosting and DNS are managed by Cloudflare, providing robust infrastructure and security features. The site supports modern TLS protocols and uses OCSP stapling. Performance metrics indicate a slow load time (~21.6 seconds) and a high number of resources (267), suggesting potential technical debt or optimization opportunities. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices including meta tags and structured data. The extensive use of third-party scripts requires careful management to avoid performance and security issues.
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 neoassist.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 neoassist.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.