Skip to main content

Security report for perimeter81.com

Check Point SASE · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Check Point's SASE subdomain represents a mature cybersecurity business focused on delivering Secure Access Service Edge solutions, formerly branded as Perimeter 81. The website targets enterprise customers seeking unified network security and cloud-based protection. The technical infrastructure is modern, leveraging WordPress CMS with advanced marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager, Visual Website Optimizer, and Marketo. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though explicit security headers and policies could be improved. Privacy compliance is limited by the absence of visible privacy and cookie policies, which should be addressed to meet regulatory standards. Overall, the site reflects a professional and trustworthy brand consistent with Check Point's market position.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

6 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 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

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

Keep watching perimeter81.com

This scan found 20 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
15
Email security
85
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
72

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 business operates in the technology sector, specifically cybersecurity, offering SaaS-based SASE solutions. It leverages a strong parent brand, Check Point, and integrates legacy Perimeter 81 offerings. The target market includes enterprises requiring scalable network security. The business model is subscription-based SaaS with a focus on cloud security. Marketing efforts are sophisticated, using A/B testing and partner affiliate programs. The lack of direct contact information on the homepage suggests lead generation is managed via forms and marketing automation. The company maintains a consistent brand image and positions itself as a global leader in network security.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No published security policy, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure programs were found, which are important for transparency and trust. The use of multiple third-party scripts introduces potential risk vectors, though no vulnerable libraries were detected. Recommendations include publishing security policies, adding security headers, and providing clear security contact channels to enhance trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to strengthen site security.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to increase transparency.
  4. Establish and disclose a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Check Point SASE
Description
Boost your Network Security in minutes and secure corporate network with Check Point’s SASE (Formerly Perimeter 81)
Key services
SASE platform, Network security, Corporate network protection
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress CMS, Yoast SEO plugin, Google Tag Manager, Visual Website Optimizer (VWO), jQuery 3.7.1, Rocket Lazy Load Scripts, Marketo marketing automation, Intercom chat widget, PartnerStack affiliate scripts
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of CSP violation event listener (partial)
  • Lazy loading scripts to improve performance

Analytics and tracking

Services
Visual Website Optimizer, Google Tag Manager, Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Visual Website Optimizer, Hotjar
Marketing tools
Marketo, Intercom
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a subdomain of checkpoint.com focused on SASE solutions formerly branded as Perimeter 81.
  2. Content is professionally presented with marketing and product information.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the homepage HTML.
  4. Multiple marketing and analytics scripts are used for optimization and tracking.
  5. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages detected in the provided HTML.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  7. WHOIS data for the subdomain is not separately available, consistent with subdomain usage.
  8. Website uses HTTPS and modern web technologies with good SEO metadata.
  9. No signs of adult or questionable content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery 3.7.1, Google Tag Manager, and Visual Website Optimizer for analytics and optimization. It uses lazy loading scripts to improve performance and is mobile optimized with responsive design. SEO is well implemented with Yoast SEO plugin and comprehensive metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Hosting provider details are not explicit but the site uses multiple CDN and marketing domains. Performance is fast with preloading of fonts and images. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in security headers and accessibility could be made.
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 perimeter81.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 perimeter81.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.