Skip to main content

Security report for octagonasset.co.nz

Octagon Asset Management Ltd · Finance · New Zealand

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

Octagon Asset Management Ltd is a boutique funds management company based in New Zealand, launched in November 2021. The company offers a range of nine professionally-managed investment funds targeting investors seeking diversified portfolio options. Their website is professionally designed using Silverstripe CMS and Bootstrap, with a focus on clear navigation and mobile responsiveness. The technical infrastructure includes Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced, but lacks some security headers and explicit incident response contacts. Privacy compliance is adequate with a clear privacy policy and terms of service, though no cookie consent mechanism was detected. WHOIS data for the domain is unavailable, which raises some concerns about domain registration transparency but does not negate the professional presentation and content of the site.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

3 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.

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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.

    • 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 octagonasset.co.nz

This scan found 16 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
77
Security headers
85
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
81

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 finance sector, specifically in managed funds and wealth management. It targets retail and institutional investors in New Zealand and Australia. The business model is centered on offering diversified investment funds managed by experienced professionals. The website content and structure indicate a small-sized boutique firm with a regional presence. The lack of WHOIS data is unusual but the presence of a Product Disclosure Statement and clear contact channels supports legitimacy. The company appears to maintain a professional partnership ecosystem and provides regular fund updates to clients, indicating a focus on transparency and client engagement.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and no visible sensitive data exposure. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. There is no visible security.txt or dedicated incident response contact information, which limits the ability to report vulnerabilities. Privacy compliance is partially met with a privacy policy and terms of service, but the lack of a cookie consent mechanism is a compliance gap. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the business type but could be improved to align with best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with privacy regulations such as GDPR and enhance user transparency.
  3. Publish a security.txt file and provide explicit incident response contact information to facilitate vulnerability reporting and improve security culture.
  4. Conduct a WHOIS domain registration review to ensure transparency and legitimacy of domain ownership information.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Octagon Asset Management Ltd
Description
Octagon Asset Management is a boutique funds management company launched in November 2021 with teams in Wellington, Auckland, and Queenstown. They focus on creating future wealth through a disciplined investment approach and offer nine professionally-managed funds.
Key services
Managed investment funds, Investment portfolio management, Fund updates and disclosures
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Bootstrap, Silverstripe CMS
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable, which is unusual and reduces trust.
  3. Website uses modern CMS and frameworks with good design and navigation.
  4. No explicit cookie consent mechanism found, which may impact compliance.
  5. No visible security.txt or incident response contacts.
  6. Contact information includes phone and contact page but no direct emails found in HTML.
  7. No social media links detected in the provided HTML.
  8. Privacy policy and terms of service are present and accessible.
  9. Website content is finance-focused, safe, and professional.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Silverstripe CMS version 5.2 with Bootstrap framework for responsive design. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking. The site loads with moderate performance and is mobile optimized. Meta tags and SEO elements are properly implemented. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. However, the absence of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates areas for modernization and compliance improvement. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the provided data. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and functional online presence.
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 octagonasset.co.nz. 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 octagonasset.co.nz.

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.