Skip to main content

Security report for pacstar.com

Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions · Technology · N/a

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

78/100

Risk levelLow

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

Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions, featuring the PacStar brand, is a leading provider of advanced tactical and enterprise communications systems tailored for complex defense and government applications. The company operates under the larger Curtiss-Wright Corporation umbrella, positioning itself as a key player in defense technology with a focus on interoperability and secure communications. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive product information and professional branding. Technically, the site is built on Drupal 11 and leverages modern analytics and consent management tools, indicating a well-maintained infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforcement and cookie consent mechanisms, though explicit security headers could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a notable concern, potentially indicating recent registration or privacy protection, which slightly impacts trustworthiness. Overall, the site is professional, secure, and compliant with privacy regulations, serving a specialized government and defense audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

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 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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

      What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"

  3. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching pacstar.com

This scan found 17 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
75
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
78

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 targets government and defense sectors requiring rugged, secure communications solutions. Its business model is B2B, supplying hardware and software for tactical and enterprise communications. The market position is strong, supported by a broad product portfolio including modular hardware, classified communication solutions, and enterprise IT offerings. The parent company Curtiss-Wright provides additional credibility and resources. The website's use of advanced marketing tools like Eloqua and analytics platforms suggests a sophisticated approach to customer engagement and lead generation. The lack of direct contact information on the analyzed page may indicate a controlled sales process typical in defense industries. The partnership ecosystem includes internal subsidiaries and related domains, reinforcing brand cohesion.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS and cookie consent compliance. Use of reputable third-party scripts and consent management tools aligns with best practices. However, explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy are not clearly present in the analyzed content, representing an area for enhancement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The absence of a public incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy is common in defense sector sites but could be improved for transparency. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from additional header implementations and published security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify comprehensive security headers including X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and trust with users and partners.
  3. Audit third-party scripts regularly to ensure no vulnerabilities or privacy issues arise from external dependencies.
  4. Consider publishing contact information or secure contact forms for security incidents and data protection officer communications.
  5. Investigate and clarify domain WHOIS information to improve domain trustworthiness and reduce suspicion.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions
Description
PacStar is a leading developer and supplier of advanced, interoperable tactical and enterprise communications systems for organizations with complex communications requirements.
Key services
Tactical communications systems, Enterprise communications systems, Modular hardware, Commercial Solutions for Classified (CSfC), Integrated solutions, IQ-Core software, Enterprise IT solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Drupal 11, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, JW Player, Monsido Consent Manager, Eloqua Marketing Automation, CookiesJSR
Frameworks
Drupal
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Consent management for cookies
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of reputable third-party libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Crazy Egg
Tracking pixels
Monsido
Marketing tools
Eloqua
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professional and targeted at defense and government sectors.
  3. Strong use of modern web technologies and consent management.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found on this page.
  5. WHOIS data is missing, which is a concern for domain legitimacy verification.
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies found on this page.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected.
  9. No data protection officer contact information found.
  10. Website uses multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Drupal 11, a modern and secure CMS platform, indicating up-to-date infrastructure. It uses Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for analytics, Eloqua for marketing automation, and Monsido for consent management, reflecting a mature digital marketing stack. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured navigation. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple third-party scripts but remains acceptable. No critical technical debt or outdated libraries were detected. Opportunities exist to enhance security headers and improve domain registration transparency.
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 pacstar.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 pacstar.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.