Skip to main content

Security report for simulations-plus.com

Simulations Plus, Inc. · Technology · United States

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in SSL/TLS.

Security score

86/100

Risk levelLow

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

Simulations Plus, Inc. is a specialized technology company focused on providing advanced biosimulation software and consulting services that support drug discovery through commercialization. Their offerings integrate AI, machine learning, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacometrics to serve pharmaceutical, biotechnology, academic, and regulatory clients. The company positions itself as a niche leader with a medium-sized business footprint, founded in 2016, and maintains a professional and content-rich website that effectively communicates its expertise and services. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Matomo Analytics, and marketing tools like Marketo and Hotjar. The site is well-optimized for SEO, mobile-friendly, and demonstrates good accessibility standards. Performance is moderate, with room for improvement in hosting and speed optimizations. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and implements basic security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. However, it lacks comprehensive security policies, incident response information, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a concern but does not negate the legitimacy of the business given the professional web presence and social media links. Overall, the website presents a low-risk profile with strong business credibility and technical maturity. Strategic improvements in security transparency and WHOIS data visibility would enhance trust and compliance posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching simulations-plus.com

This scan found 16 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
90
Email security
75
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
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 simulations-plus.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
3
Employees
0
Customers
3
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

2 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 simulations-plus.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Simulations Plus operates in the technology and healthcare sectors, targeting pharmaceutical and biotech companies, academic researchers, and regulatory bodies. Their business model revolves around software sales and consulting services, leveraging advanced biosimulation technologies. The company demonstrates competitive advantages through integration of AI and machine learning with pharmacometric modeling, positioning itself as a specialized provider in a niche market. Revenue streams likely include software licensing, consulting fees, and training. The company maintains active social media channels and uses multiple marketing and analytics tools, indicating a growth-oriented and digitally mature approach. Partnerships and subsidiaries are not explicitly identified, suggesting a focused operational scope. The website content and branding are consistent and professional, supporting a high level of business credibility.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is moderate to good. HTTPS is properly implemented, and basic security headers are present, though some important headers like Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security are missing. The site uses cookie consent management compliant with GDPR, and security plugins help mitigate common WordPress vulnerabilities such as user enumeration. However, there is no publicly available security policy or incident response plan, which limits transparency and preparedness perception. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found, which are recommended best practices. The use of multiple third-party analytics and marketing scripts introduces potential privacy and security risks that require ongoing monitoring. Overall, the site demonstrates awareness of security fundamentals but would benefit from enhanced policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to strengthen defense against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to improve transparency and preparedness for security incidents.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to minimize vulnerabilities and privacy risks.
  5. Enhance WHOIS registration visibility or clarify domain privacy usage to improve trust and legitimacy perception.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Simulations Plus, Inc.
Description
We offer biosimulation software and solutions which bridge AI/machine learning, PBPK/pharmacokinetics, quantitative systems pharmacology, pharmacometrics
Key services
Biosimulation software, Consulting for drug discovery and development, Pharmacokinetics and pharmacometrics solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Matomo Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar, Marketo Munchkin
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • Use of security plugins (e.g., stop-user-enumeration)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo, Google Analytics, Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo, LinkedIn Insight, Hotjar, Marketo Munchkin
Marketing tools
Marketo
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich.
  2. Strong focus on biosimulation and pharmaceutical software solutions.
  3. Multiple analytics and marketing tools integrated with consent management.
  4. No signs of adult or questionable content.
  5. WHOIS data missing, which reduces trust but not conclusive of illegitimacy.
  6. Security headers present but could be improved.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using PHP and jQuery, enhanced with modern SEO and analytics tools such as Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, Matomo, Hotjar, and Marketo. The site uses multiple external resources including Google Fonts and LinkedIn Insight tags. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from improved hosting performance and additional security headers. The site architecture supports clear navigation and professional presentation, contributing to excellent content quality and user experience. Technical debt appears low, but ongoing maintenance of third-party integrations is essential to mitigate risks.
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 simulations-plus.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 simulations-plus.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.