PortlandLabs, Inc. · Technology · United States
Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.
PortlandLabs, Inc. is a technology company specializing in delivering innovative, secure, and scalable digital solutions primarily targeting government agencies and large enterprises. The company emphasizes compliance with rigorous security frameworks such as ISO 27001, HIPAA, SOC2, and IL2/IL4, serving clients including the U.S. Department of Defense and Fortune 100 companies. Their service offerings span artificial intelligence, web content management, analytics, managed IT, application development, user experience design, and data privacy and protection. The website reflects a mature business with a professional online presence and strong trust indicators such as client logos and testimonials. Technically, the website is built on Concrete CMS and employs modern web technologies including jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Matomo Analytics, and Userback for feedback. The site is mobile optimized with good SEO and accessibility basics, though some improvements in accessibility and cookie consent mechanisms are recommended. Performance is moderate, with no critical technical issues detected. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and claims compliance with multiple security standards. However, no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data, and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable anomaly that may warrant further investigation to confirm domain legitimacy. Overall, PortlandLabs presents a credible and professional digital presence with a strong security and compliance focus. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance with cookie consent, publishing security policies and incident response contacts, and verifying domain registration details to strengthen trust and transparency.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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.
Controls resources the browser is allowed to load
What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies
What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit
SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.
DKIM selector 'google' uses 960-bit key
What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA keys for DKIM
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1
What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions
SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak
What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
This scan found 22 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.
€25per month
Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.
Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention portlandlabs.com, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for portlandlabs.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with portlandlabs.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review portlandlabs.com.