Skip to main content

Security report for tenderlink.com

illion TenderLink · Government · New Zealand

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

81/100

Risk levelLow

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

illion TenderLink is a well-established provider of e-procurement and tender notification services primarily serving Australia and New Zealand. The company offers subscription-based access to tender opportunities, procurement software solutions, and related workshops, targeting suppliers and buyers in government and other sectors. The website reflects a mature business with over 25 years of industry experience and a strong market presence. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern frameworks like Bootstrap and integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, and Facebook Pixel, indicating a digitally mature infrastructure. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and use of reCAPTCHA, though some security headers could be improved. Privacy and terms of service pages are present and comprehensive, supporting GDPR compliance, but cookie consent mechanisms are lacking. Overall, the site is professional, trustworthy, and well-optimized for its target audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

    • 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

  2. 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 tenderlink.com

This scan found 15 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
77
Security headers
90
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
81

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

The business operates in the government and procurement sectors, providing essential services that connect suppliers with buyers through tender notifications and e-procurement platforms. Its subscription model generates recurring revenue, supported by a broad partner ecosystem and a strong brand identity under the illion group. The company leverages digital marketing and analytics extensively to optimize user engagement and conversion. The presence of testimonials and detailed service descriptions enhances credibility. The company targets medium to large enterprises and government entities, positioning itself as a key player in the Australasian procurement market. Strategic partnerships and a comprehensive service offering provide competitive advantages and growth potential.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS and anti-spam measures like Google reCAPTCHA. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents a potential area for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of a public incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy suggests an opportunity to enhance transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is supported by detailed policies, but cookie consent mechanisms should be implemented to fully align with GDPR and similar regulations. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from additional hardening and formalized incident response documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to improve security transparency and incident response readiness.
  4. Regularly audit and update WordPress core and plugins to minimize risk from known vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic security training to foster a strong security culture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
illion TenderLink
Description
Australia & New Zealand Tenders & e-Procurement Solutions
Key services
Tender notification services, e-Procurement software, Tender advertising, Evaluation toolset, Workshops and training
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap 4.3.1, jQuery 3.6.0, Google Tag Manager, Google Optimize, Visual Website Optimizer, Algolia Search, Gravity Forms, Hotjar, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Bing Ads
Frameworks
WordPress CMS, Bootstrap CSS Framework
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v2 invisible
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security plugins (implied by WordPress)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager), Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads, Facebook Ads, LinkedIn Ads, Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar
Marketing tools
Google Optimize, Visual Website Optimizer
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a subdomain of tenderlink.com, focused on e-procurement search portals.
  2. Content is business-focused, targeting suppliers and buyers in procurement.
  3. Uses modern web technologies and tracking tools.
  4. Includes a contact form with reCAPTCHA for spam protection.
  5. No WHOIS data for subdomain, which is normal.
  6. Privacy and terms pages are present and accessible.
  7. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
  9. No explicit security or incident response policies found on site.
  10. Phone contact number clearly displayed with call-to-action.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using Bootstrap for responsive design and jQuery for client-side scripting. It integrates advanced search capabilities via Algolia and uses multiple marketing and analytics tools including Google Tag Manager, Hotjar, and Facebook Pixel. Performance is moderate with room for optimization, particularly in loading external scripts. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly with proper meta tags and structured data. Technical debt appears low, but some legacy scripts and missing security headers indicate opportunities for modernization and improved security posture. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs effectively with scalable and maintainable components.
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 tenderlink.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 tenderlink.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.