Skip to main content

Security report for psicorp.com

Physical Sciences Inc. · Technology · N/a

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Physical Sciences Inc. is a contract research and development company specializing in a wide range of technical areas serving government and commercial customers. The company positions itself as an established R&D service provider with a focus on innovation and delivery of advanced products and technologies. The website is professionally designed using WordPress CMS, featuring structured data for SEO and a clear navigation structure that supports user engagement. The technical infrastructure includes modern plugins and tracking tools such as Google Analytics and Tag Manager, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and secure form usage; however, the absence of security headers and explicit privacy policies suggests room for improvement. The lack of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, although the website content and branding are consistent and professional. Overall, the site presents a credible business front but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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 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 psicorp.com

This scan found 21 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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
68
Average
58
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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 operates primarily in the technology and government sectors, offering contract R&D services and a portfolio of products including sensors, propulsion systems, and materials. Its business model focuses on serving specialized markets with advanced technical solutions. The website content targets government and commercial clients, emphasizing innovation and technical expertise. The use of structured data and SEO plugins suggests an intent to maintain a strong online presence. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the domain data. The absence of explicit contact information and privacy policies may impact customer trust and regulatory compliance. The company appears to maintain a medium-sized operation with a focus on technical excellence and market specialization.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications, and uses secure form plugins for data collection. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are important for mitigating common web vulnerabilities. There is no evidence of published incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies, nor contact channels dedicated to security issues. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no visible cookie consent mechanisms or GDPR-related disclosures. The use of third-party plugins necessitates regular security audits to prevent vulnerabilities. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing best practices and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to enhance GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen web security.
  3. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies along with dedicated security contact information.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Improve transparency by providing clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for business and security inquiries.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Physical Sciences Inc.
Description
Physical Sciences Inc. provides contract research and development services in a wide diversity of technical areas to both government and commercial customers.
Key services
Research & Development, Products, Contract R&D services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.5.5, Yoast SEO plugin, jQuery 3.7.1, AddToAny sharing plugin, Ninja Forms plugin
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure forms (Ninja Forms)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in provided content
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content
  4. Use of modern WordPress CMS with SEO and form plugins
  5. Google Analytics and Tag Manager used for tracking
  6. No visible security headers detected in provided data
  7. WHOIS data missing, raising domain legitimacy questions
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.5.5, utilizing popular plugins such as Yoast SEO for search optimization, Ninja Forms for secure data collection, and AddToAny for social sharing. The site loads jQuery 3.7.1 and integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking user behavior. The design is responsive and optimized for mobile devices, with good navigation clarity and structured content. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected in the provided HTML. However, the absence of security headers and explicit privacy mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and compliance areas. Hosting provider details were not discernible from the data. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but requires enhancements in security and privacy implementations.
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 psicorp.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 psicorp.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.