Skip to main content

Security report for towerdata.com

AtData · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

AtData is a specialized technology company focused on email address intelligence, providing services such as email validation, fraud prevention, identity matching, and data licensing. The company positions itself as a leader in the email data space with over 25 years of expertise and a strong client base including major global brands. Their business model revolves around leveraging first-party data and advanced machine learning to enhance marketing and fraud prevention efforts. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including jQuery, FontAwesome, and multiple marketing and analytics integrations such as HubSpot, Google Analytics, and Demandbase. Hosting is inferred to be on AWS, supported by DNS nameservers. The site is well-optimized for SEO, mobile-friendly, and provides a professional user experience. Security-wise, AtData demonstrates a mature posture with HTTPS enforced, ISO 27001 certification, GDPR compliance, and cookie consent mechanisms. However, there is room for improvement in publishing explicit security headers and vulnerability disclosure information. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and compliant with relevant privacy regulations.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

8 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  3. 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 towerdata.com

This scan found 28 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. See sample alerts.

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
42
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
45
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
59

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

AtData holds a strong market position as an essential provider of email-centric data intelligence solutions, targeting marketers, fraud prevention professionals, and data licensing customers. Their competitive advantage lies in their extensive email identity database, real-time activity signals, and machine learning capabilities. Revenue streams likely include subscription-based API access, data licensing, and consulting services. The company demonstrates growth through continuous product expansion and integration with major marketing platforms. Their partnership ecosystem includes integrations with leading marketing automation and CRM tools. Strategic observations indicate a focus on data accuracy, fraud mitigation, and identity resolution as key differentiators in a competitive market.

Security posture

The security maturity level of AtData is high, supported by ISO 27001 certification and GDPR compliance. The website uses HTTPS exclusively and implements cookie consent mechanisms, reflecting good privacy practices. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy and a public vulnerability disclosure or incident response contact reduces transparency. There is no visible security.txt file or dedicated incident response page. Overall, the company shows strong data protection commitment but could enhance transparency and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve browser security.
  2. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  3. Provide explicit incident response contact information or a dedicated security contact email to improve trust and readiness.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking pixels to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance with evolving regulations.
  5. Enhance documentation on data retention policies and user data handling to strengthen privacy compliance and user trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
AtData
Description
Unlock intelligence about the person behind the email address with email validation, data enrichment, identity matching, and fraud protection.
Key services
Email Validation, Fraud Prevention, Identity Matching, Data Licensing, Consumer Insights
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, FontAwesome, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot Scripts, Demandbase, Bing Ads, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Google Analytics, WordPress
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ISO 27001 certified
  • GDPR compliant
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics, Bing Ads, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
HubSpot, Demandbase, LinkedIn Insight, G2 Crowd
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Demandbase
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 with clear navigation and comprehensive content.
  2. Strong focus on email address intelligence and fraud prevention services.
  3. Robust integration with major marketing and analytics platforms.
  4. ISO 27001 certification and GDPR compliance are prominently displayed.
  5. No signs of content blocking or WAF interference.
  6. Contact information is clearly provided with multiple channels.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts found.
  8. Use of multiple tracking and marketing scripts indicates extensive user behavior analytics.
Technical notes

Notes

The website infrastructure is robust, leveraging WordPress CMS with a modern and well-maintained technology stack including jQuery and FontAwesome. Integration with multiple marketing and analytics platforms such as HubSpot, Google Analytics, Demandbase, and LinkedIn Insight indicates a mature digital marketing strategy. Hosting appears to be on AWS, supported by DNS configuration. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is well-implemented using Yoast SEO plugin with comprehensive meta tags and structured data. Technical risks are minimal, but reliance on multiple third-party scripts requires ongoing monitoring to avoid potential vulnerabilities or privacy issues.
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 towerdata.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 towerdata.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.