Skip to main content

Security report for prosek.com

Prosek Partners · Finance · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Prosek Partners is a well-established integrated communications and marketing firm with over 30 years of experience, primarily serving clients in finance, investor relations, and related sectors. The company offers a broad range of services including PR, crisis management, digital marketing, and public affairs, positioning itself as a future-focused leader in its industry. The website reflects a professional and polished brand image with comprehensive content and strong SEO and accessibility features. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and integrations but suffers from a critical security shortfall due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS enforcement. This significantly impacts the security posture and trustworthiness from a technical perspective. Privacy and cookie policies are present and indicate GDPR compliance, though no explicit security or incident response policies are published. Overall, the site is user-friendly and credible but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

4 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 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 prosek.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
50
Security headers
30
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
60

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

Prosek Partners operates in the finance and communications sectors, targeting corporate clients requiring sophisticated marketing and PR services. The firm leverages a multi-service business model with offerings spanning executive coaching, sustainable communications, and digital analytics. The presence of high-profile client logos and industry awards suggests a strong market position and reputation. The company maintains partnerships, such as with beccapr.com for hospitality services, indicating a collaborative ecosystem. The website's content and structure support lead generation and brand positioning, with a focus on innovation and future readiness. The lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers on the site suggests a controlled communication approach, likely funneling inquiries through contact forms.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and no HTTPS support, exposing users to potential data interception risks. While some security headers like HSTS are present, they are ineffective without HTTPS. No advanced security policies or incident response contacts are published, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The site uses reputable third-party services and CDNs but does not implement DNSSEC or CAA records, missing opportunities to harden DNS security. No vulnerable libraries or known exploits were detected in the visible content. Overall, the security maturity is low, and the absence of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability that must be addressed immediately.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Configure web server to support modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and 1.3) and strong cipher suites.
  3. Implement full HSTS policy with includeSubDomains and preload directives to enforce HTTPS.
  4. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.
  5. Enable DNSSEC and CAA DNS records to enhance domain security and certificate issuance control.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with a modern theme and uses popular plugins such as Yoast SEO for search optimization, WPML for multilingual support, and CookieYes for cookie consent management. It leverages Amazon CloudFront CDN for content delivery and integrates Google Tag Manager and reCAPTCHA for analytics and bot protection. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO metadata and structured data in JSON-LD format. However, performance metrics are missing or zero, indicating potential issues with resource loading measurement or caching. The absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent significant technical risks. The site uses jQuery and Vimeo Player API for interactive content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but requires urgent security upgrades.
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 prosek.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 prosek.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.