Skip to main content

Security report for unitcorp.com

Unit Corporation · Energy · United States

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Unit Corporation is a well-established energy company specializing in oil and natural gas exploration and production. The company has a strong market presence with a domain registered since 1996, reflecting its long-standing operations. The website is built on WordPress using the Divi theme and incorporates common JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and DataTables, indicating a standard modern web infrastructure. While the site presents professional design and relevant business content, it lacks visible privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, which are critical for compliance and user trust. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but missing advanced security headers and incident response information. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security practices.

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

8 findings 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

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching unitcorp.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
47
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
57

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 unitcorp.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
9
Employees
0
Customers
6
Third parties
3
Weak passwords
67%

3 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 unitcorp.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Unit Corporation operates in the energy sector, focusing on oil and natural gas. Its business model revolves around exploration, production, and energy services targeting investors and industry stakeholders. The domain age and WHOIS data align with the company's history, supporting legitimacy. The website content is relevant and targeted to a professional audience, but lacks detailed contact and compliance information. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the website content. The company appears to maintain a consistent brand image and moderate trustworthiness online.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS, which is mandatory for secure communications. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security, which are best practices to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is present, limiting transparency for security researchers. No incident response contacts or security policies are published. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates potential compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. Overall, the security posture is basic and could be significantly improved to reduce risk and enhance user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear consent mechanisms to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance security posture.
  3. Publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response channels such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  5. Regularly audit and update website technologies and dependencies to avoid vulnerabilities and improve performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Unit Corporation
Description
Unit Corporation is an energy company primarily engaged in oil and natural gas exploration, production, and related services.
Key services
Oil and natural gas exploration, Production, Energy services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, DataTables, Divi Theme
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses WordPress with Divi theme and common JS libraries.
  2. No visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the main HTML content.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided content.
  4. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information present.
  5. HTTPS is enabled but no advanced security headers detected.
  6. WHOIS data shows a long-established domain with no privacy protection.
  7. No signs of WAF or content blocking.
  8. Content is corporate and safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with the Divi theme, using jQuery and DataTables libraries. The HTML is valid and the site appears mobile responsive with good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate, likely due to external resources and standard CMS overhead. Accessibility features are basic but present. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected in the provided content. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. The site does not use DNSSEC, which could improve DNS security. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 unitcorp.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 unitcorp.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.