Skip to main content

Security report for reply.com

Reply · Technology · Italy

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

86/100

Risk levelLow

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

Reply is an established enterprise specializing in digital services, technology, and consulting. The company supports leading industrial groups by leveraging advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, big data, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things to enable innovative business models. Their market position is strong within the technology consulting sector, offering a broad portfolio of services including AI, cybersecurity, digital commerce, and supply chain management. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive service offerings and a clear focus on enterprise clients. Technically, the website employs modern marketing and analytics technologies including HubSpot, Google Analytics, and OneTrust for cookie consent management. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices, has good accessibility features, and demonstrates solid SEO practices. Performance is moderate, with no critical technical issues detected. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and includes standard security headers, indicating a good baseline security posture. However, explicit security policies, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not publicly available, which could be improved to enhance transparency and trust. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain registration trust analysis, but the professional presentation and contact information mitigate concerns. Overall, Reply's website presents a professional, secure, and privacy-conscious digital front that aligns with its enterprise consulting business. Strategic recommendations include publishing detailed security policies, establishing a vulnerability disclosure program, and enhancing incident response contact channels to further strengthen security posture and stakeholder trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  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.

    • Medium

      Missing Permissions-Policy header

      Controls browser features and APIs

      What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access

      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Permissions-Policy: accelerometer=(), autoplay=(), camera=(), cross-origin-isolated=(),…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  3. 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.

    • Medium

      DMARC not enforcing

      DMARC policy is set to "none"

      What to do: Gradually move to "quarantine" then "reject" policy

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

  4. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035

Keep watching reply.com

This scan found 14 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
100
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
86

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention reply.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4,291
Employees
17
Customers
4,092
Third parties
182
Weak passwords
6%

Latest record dated 2026-06-06 · 37 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for reply.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –changepwd.reply.com2026-06-06
  • –changepwd.reply.com2026-06-03
  • –geco.reply.com2026-05-17
  • –changepwd.reply.com2026-05-12
  • –geco.reply.com2026-04-21

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Reply operates as a technology consulting network targeting large industrial and enterprise clients. Their competitive advantage lies in their specialization across emerging technologies and their ability to integrate these into business transformation projects. The business model is service-oriented, focusing on consulting, system integration, and digital innovation. Revenue streams likely include consulting fees, managed services, and technology implementation projects. The company targets sectors such as manufacturing, finance, telecommunications, and retail. Growth indicators include the launch of new AI-powered applications and recognition in Gartner Magic Quadrants. The partnership ecosystem includes technology vendors and digital platforms, supported by a strong online presence and thought leadership content.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforcement and multiple security headers implemented. The presence of a cookie consent mechanism indicates GDPR compliance efforts. However, the lack of a publicly available security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure program suggests room for improvement in transparency and readiness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The use of third-party scripts is standard but requires ongoing monitoring to mitigate supply chain risks. Overall, the security maturity is good but could be enhanced by formalizing and publishing security governance documents and incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible from the website footer.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Enhance contact channels for security incidents with dedicated security or abuse email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and marketing tools to minimize supply chain vulnerabilities.
  5. Increase visibility of certifications or compliance badges to reinforce trust and credibility.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Reply
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Reply
Description
Reply is a network of highly specialized companies that support leading industrial groups in defining and developing business models enabled by new technologies such as AI, big data, cloud computing, digital communication, and the Internet of Things.
Key services
Artificial Intelligence, AI-powered Software Engineering, Cloud Computing, CX & Digital Commerce, Cybersecurity, Data World, Design, Digital Assets, Digital Experience, Gaming
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HubSpot, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Sleeknote, OneTrust Cookie Consent
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of analytics with consent

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Facebook Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Sleeknote
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. WHOIS data unavailable, possibly due to privacy protection or domain registration under different name.
  4. Strong presence of privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms.
  5. Use of multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools.
  6. No visible security policy or incident response information.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  8. Contact information is clear and includes email, phone, and physical address.
  9. Content is business-focused and safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack with HubSpot for marketing automation, Google Tag Manager and Analytics for tracking, and OneTrust for cookie consent management. The HTML is well-structured with JSON-LD structured data for SEO and rich snippets. Performance is moderate, with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. No CMS was explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The site uses multiple external domains for content delivery and analytics, which is typical for enterprise websites. Technical risks are low but include dependency on third-party scripts that require monitoring.
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 reply.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 reply.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.