Skip to main content

Security report for vidora.com

Vidora · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Vidora operates as a no-code machine learning platform focused on transforming consumer data into actionable predictions and automation. The company has positioned itself as a specialized B2B SaaS provider in the technology sector, targeting businesses seeking to leverage machine learning without extensive coding expertise. The website branding and content reflect a professional and consistent image aligned with its market positioning. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with integrations such as HubSpot Analytics and OneTrust for cookie consent, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent mechanisms in place, but lacks explicit security headers and published privacy policies, which are areas for improvement. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy, although the association with mParticle, a known entity, lends credibility. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 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

5 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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching vidora.com

This scan found 22 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
69

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

Vidora's market positioning as a no-code machine learning platform for consumer data places it in a competitive niche within the technology sector. Its business model focuses on providing accessible machine learning tools to enterprises, likely generating revenue through subscription SaaS offerings. The rebranding or acquisition by mParticle suggests strategic alignment with a larger data platform ecosystem, potentially expanding its market reach. The website's lack of explicit contact information and privacy documentation may limit trust among prospective clients. However, the integration of marketing and analytics tools indicates active engagement in digital marketing and customer insights. The company appears to be medium-sized with a focus on technology innovation and automation services.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enabled and a cookie consent banner implemented via OneTrust, supporting GDPR compliance efforts. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which could hinder timely reporting and mitigation of security issues. The lack of visible contact information for security or abuse reporting further limits incident response readiness. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but requires enhancements in transparency and technical controls to meet higher compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages prominently on the website.
  2. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options) to improve security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and abuse reporting channels.
  4. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Vidora
Description
Finally, a no-code Machine Learning Platform purpose-built to transform user data to predictions and automation.
Key services
No-code machine learning platform, Consumer data transformation, Predictions and automation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, HubSpot Analytics, OneTrust Consent Management
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
HubSpot Analytics
Marketing tools
HubSpot, OneTrust
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and no blocking detected.
  2. No WHOIS data available for domain, raising questions about domain registration status.
  3. Cookie consent banner is implemented with OneTrust.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  6. Website uses WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO and HubSpot analytics integration.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. Website branding is consistent and professional.
  9. No adult or explicit content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin, leveraging jQuery and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing integrations. Cookie consent is managed through OneTrust, indicating attention to privacy compliance. The site loads a variety of external scripts from trusted domains such as HubSpot and Google, supporting marketing and analytics functions. Performance is moderate with no critical errors detected in the HTML content. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are well implemented. However, the site lacks advanced accessibility features and some security best practices in HTTP headers. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid 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 vidora.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 vidora.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.