Skip to main content

Security report for silica.com

Avnet silica · Semiconductors · Belgium

Partial score · DNS & email only

73/100

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

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
Not assessed
GDPR outside view
Not assessed

Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.

Priority findings

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

  1. 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 DKIM record found

      DKIM adds cryptographic signatures to emails

      What to do: Configure DKIM with your email provider

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

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

  2. 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 silica.com

This scan found 7 issues across 2 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

Email security
60
DNS health
85
Average
73

Not counted

  • SSL/TLS: did not complete in this scan.
  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • Network security: did not complete in this scan.
  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

Due to the blocked content, no direct business intelligence data could be extracted. The domain belongs to Avnet, a known global technology solutions provider, but no subsidiary or partner domains were identified from the limited HTML content. No business model, market positioning, or revenue stream information is available from the analyzed page. The lack of accessible content restricts any detailed competitive or strategic analysis.

Security posture

The website employs a security challenge page with CAPTCHA, indicating the use of a WAF or similar bot mitigation technology. This is a positive security control to prevent automated abuse. However, no security headers or SSL/TLS configuration details could be verified due to the blocked content. The absence of visible privacy and cookie policies suggests potential compliance gaps. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure information are also not present. Overall, the security posture appears cautious but lacks transparency in publicly accessible information.

Recommendations

  1. Provide a publicly accessible version of the website or a staging environment for security and compliance audits.
  2. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Include contact information and business legitimacy details on accessible pages.
  4. Implement and expose security headers and SSL/TLS best practices for improved security posture.
  5. Consider providing a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Detected a security challenge page with CAPTCHA iframe and minimal content indicating WAF or bot protection blocking access These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
25/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is blocked by a security challenge (likely WAF)
  2. No meaningful HTML content available for analysis
  3. No metadata, structured data, or business information found
  4. No contact information or policies detected
  5. WHOIS data is unavailable or protected
  6. Security posture cannot be fully assessed due to blocked content
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 silica.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 silica.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.