Skip to main content

Security report for safety.io

Safety IO · Energy · Canada

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Safety IO is a specialized information and consulting service focused on empowering industrial safety through innovation and compliance with functional safety standards such as IEC 61508 and IEC 62443. The company targets professionals and organizations in the energy and manufacturing sectors seeking to enhance safety protocols and integrate cybersecurity and AI technologies. The website is built on WordPress, hosted by DreamHost, and uses modern SEO tools to provide a professional and informative user experience. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but lacks advanced security headers and policies. Privacy and cookie policies are absent, which impacts compliance. Overall, the domain is mature and trustworthy, with privacy protection justified for the business type.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

9 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 Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

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

Keep watching safety.io

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
47

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

Safety IO positions itself as a trusted resource and guide for industrial safety standards compliance, leveraging expertise in functional safety, cybersecurity, and AI applications. The business model revolves around providing expert insights, educational content, and consulting services. The company appears small but established since 2011, with a focus on energy and manufacturing sectors. The website content and testimonials indicate a professional approach and moderate market presence. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries are identified from the data.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS but lacks DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security, which are recommended for enhanced protection. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency. No forms or data collection points are present on the homepage, reducing attack surface. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR. Overall, the security posture is basic and could be improved to meet industry best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to secure DNS queries and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance.
  4. Add incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to enhance transparency.
  5. Provide explicit contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Safety IO
Description
Safety IO provides expert resources and guidance on adopting functional safety standards, elevating industrial reliability, and achieving compliance and excellence in safety protocols.
Key services
Safety standards education, Compliance guidance, Safety insights and resources, Consulting on cybersecurity integration and AI in safety systems
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5
Frameworks
All in One SEO
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Marketing tools
All in One SEO
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses WordPress CMS with All in One SEO plugin.
  2. No visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided on the homepage.
  4. Social media links to Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter are present but generic (no company-specific handles).
  5. No forms detected on the homepage for direct contact or data collection.
  6. Website content is professional and focused on safety standards and compliance.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No security headers detected in provided data; DNSSEC not enabled.
  9. Domain registration uses privacy protection but is consistent with business type and age.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform with a well-structured theme and SEO plugin integration. Hosting by DreamHost provides reliable infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized and accessible with good navigation and content relevance. Performance is moderate, with no major technical issues detected. However, the lack of advanced security configurations and privacy compliance features indicates areas for technical improvement. The absence of analytics or tracking scripts suggests minimal user tracking, which aligns with privacy best practices but limits marketing insights.
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 safety.io. 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 safety.io.

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.