Skip to main content

Security report for wam.studio

Warren and Mahoney · Real Estate · Australia

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

74/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Warren and Mahoney is a well-established architecture practice operating primarily in Australia and New Zealand, employing approximately 350 professionals from 35 countries. The firm focuses on multidisciplinary architectural design, masterplanning, urban and sustainable design, positioning itself as an innovative leader in the architecture industry. Their website reflects a high level of professionalism with excellent design quality, clear navigation, and mobile optimization. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks such as Astro and a headless CMS (Strapi), with Google Tag Manager integrated for analytics. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced, though some security headers are missing and no explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found. Privacy compliance is good with a comprehensive privacy policy, but lacks a cookie consent mechanism. WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is common but reduces transparency slightly. Overall, the website and business present a trustworthy and professional image with room for minor security and compliance improvements.

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

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 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

    • 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

  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 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 wam.studio

This scan found 19 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
75
Security headers
50
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
74

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 company is positioned as a large, essential entity in the real estate sector, specializing in architecture and design services. Their market position is strong, highlighted by industry recognition such as being named one of the world’s most innovative architectural firms. The business model revolves around providing architectural and urban design services to clients in Australia and New Zealand. The website targets clients seeking high-quality architectural solutions and emphasizes collaboration and sustainability. The firm maintains active social media channels on Instagram and LinkedIn, supporting brand visibility and client engagement. No direct contact emails or phone numbers are publicly listed on the homepage, suggesting contact details may be on dedicated pages. The lack of detailed WHOIS registrant information is a minor transparency concern but not unusual for professional services.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications. However, it lacks several recommended security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The absence of explicit security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates room for improvement in security governance and transparency. The integration of Google Tag Manager introduces moderate user tracking, which is managed with a privacy policy but without a visible cookie consent banner, potentially impacting GDPR compliance. Overall, the security posture is good but could be strengthened by implementing additional headers, explicit security policies, and cookie consent mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies with dedicated contact channels.
  4. Enhance transparency by providing verified contact emails and phone numbers on the website.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and improve compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Warren and Mahoney
Description
We are an architecture practice based in Australia and New Zealand with approximately 350 highly engaged people from 35 countries, all eager to explore how design can meet the needs of a rapidly changing world.
Key services
Architecture, Masterplanning, Urban design, Sustainable design
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Astro, JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
Astro
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Professional architecture firm with strong branding and content.
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage; contact likely on dedicated pages.
  4. Privacy policy present and appears comprehensive; cookie consent mechanism not detected.
  5. No terms of service or explicit security/incident response policies found.
  6. Uses modern web technologies and CMS (Strapi).
  7. Social media presence on Instagram and LinkedIn.
  8. No exposed sensitive data or security vulnerabilities detected in HTML content.
  9. WHOIS data is privacy protected with no registrant details.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies, notably the Astro framework and Strapi CMS, which support fast loading times and excellent mobile responsiveness. The site uses semantic HTML and includes appropriate meta tags for SEO and social media sharing (Open Graph and Twitter cards). Google Tag Manager is used for analytics, indicating a moderate level of user tracking. The site design is visually appealing and professionally executed, with consistent branding and clear navigation. No technical errors or broken elements were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified from the content. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-implemented, supporting a positive user experience and strong digital presence.
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 wam.studio. 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 wam.studio.

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.