Skip to main content

Security report for patientsaspartnerseu.com

The Conference Forum · Healthcare · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Patients as Partners EU is a specialized conference and multimedia platform operated by The Conference Forum, focusing on advancing patient involvement in clinical research to improve medicine development outcomes. The website serves pharma R&D professionals, patient advocates, and clinical research stakeholders by providing event information, editorial content, podcasts, and webcasts. The platform positions itself as a niche leader in patient engagement within healthcare research, supported by reputable sponsors and industry experts. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript libraries and tracking tools, hosted on AWS infrastructure with Cloudfront CDN, ensuring moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and form protections, though improvements like DNSSEC and security headers are recommended. Privacy compliance is lacking as no explicit privacy or cookie policies are found. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and safe for general audiences.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching patientsaspartnerseu.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
77
Security headers
20
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
61

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 Conference Forum operates Patients as Partners EU as part of its portfolio of healthcare conferences and multimedia resources. The business model centers on event organization, content creation, and marketing services targeting pharma R&D and patient advocacy communities. The company leverages partnerships with major pharmaceutical companies and patient groups to deliver relevant, high-impact programming. The presence of multiple related domains and sponsor logos indicates a strong partnership ecosystem. Growth indicators include recurring annual events and expanding multimedia offerings. The company maintains a focused market position in healthcare conference services with a small but specialized audience.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms, and domain status flags preventing unauthorized changes. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers like CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Incident response and security policy information are not publicly available, indicating a potential compliance gap. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is secure for its purpose but would benefit from enhanced security controls and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement DNSSEC to enhance domain security and prevent DNS spoofing.
  3. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to harden the site against common web attacks.
  4. Provide explicit security incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct regular security audits to maintain high security and usability standards.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
The Conference Forum
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
The Conference Forum
Description
Conference and multimedia platform addressing patient involvement in clinical research to drive efficiencies and better outcomes in medicine development.
Key services
Annual conferences, Editorial interviews, Podcasts, Webcasts, Marketing services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap, Slick Carousel, PhotoSwipe, Select2, Google reCAPTCHA, Microsoft Clarity, Google Tag Manager, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security flags on domain (clientDeleteProhibited etc)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Microsoft Clarity, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
LinkedIn Insight Tag, Microsoft Clarity
Marketing tools
LinkedIn Insight, Google Analytics (via GTM), Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional conference site focused on patient engagement in clinical research.
  2. Content is rich with conference details, speakers, sponsors, and multimedia resources.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  4. Multiple external trusted domains linked, mostly related to healthcare and clinical research.
  5. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and tracking tools indicates moderate digital maturity.
  6. Security posture is good but could be improved with DNSSEC and security headers.
  7. Contact information is primarily via forms; no direct emails or phone numbers found.
  8. No signs of adult or questionable content; content is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern front-end technology stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, Slick Carousel, PhotoSwipe, and Select2 for UI components and interactivity. It integrates Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection and Microsoft Clarity for user behavior analytics. Hosting is on AWS infrastructure with Cloudfront CDN, supporting good performance and scalability. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. The site is mobile responsive with good navigation clarity. However, no CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Performance is moderate with potential for optimization. Technical debt appears low but security enhancements are recommended.
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 patientsaspartnerseu.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 patientsaspartnerseu.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.