Skip to main content

Security report for wbklaw.com

Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP · Other · United States

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP is a medium-sized law firm specializing in telecommunications, media, energy, transportation, and related regulatory and transactional legal services. The firm operates multiple offices in key U.S. cities and positions itself as a top-tier provider combining large firm expertise with personalized client service. The website reflects a professional and client-focused business model targeting corporate and regulatory clients in specialized sectors. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using modern frameworks such as Foundation and jQuery, with SEO optimization via Yoast. The site is mobile-optimized and performs moderately well, though accessibility features could be enhanced. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced, but lacks some security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are recommended for compliance and protection. The WHOIS data is notably missing or inaccessible, which raises some concerns about domain registration transparency. However, the website's professional content, external trust signals, and clear contact information support its legitimacy. No signs of malicious activity or adult content were detected, making the site safe for general audiences. Overall, the firm demonstrates a solid digital presence with room for improvement in privacy compliance and security best practices to enhance trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

7 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching wbklaw.com

This scan found 26 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
27
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
61

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 firm holds a strong market position in niche legal sectors such as telecommunications, energy, and emerging technologies. Its competitive advantage lies in combining large firm capabilities with personalized service. Revenue streams likely derive from legal consulting, litigation, regulatory compliance, and transactional services. The target customers are corporate clients and regulatory bodies. Growth indicators include multiple office locations and recent team expansions. The firm maintains a professional partnership ecosystem and is recognized by Chambers and Partners, enhancing its market credibility.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data exposure. However, the absence of key security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates gaps in best practices and regulatory compliance, particularly GDPR. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which limits transparency. The missing WHOIS data is a potential risk factor but may be due to registrar or query limitations rather than malicious intent. Overall, the security posture is good but could be strengthened by implementing recommended headers, privacy controls, and incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish an incident response plan or security policy page to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  4. Consider creating a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance website accessibility features to meet WCAG standards and improve user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP
Description
A different kind of law firm offering services, capabilities, standards, and expertise of a large firm combined with flexibility and client-oriented personal style.
Key services
Telecommunications and Media legal services, Transactions (commercial, technology, corporate, energy), Energy law and regulatory consulting, Security, Privacy, and Digital Policy, Intellectual Property, Transportation and Emerging Technologies, Administrative and Appellate Litigation, Enforcement and Investigations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Foundation CSS, Owl Carousel, Yoast SEO
Frameworks
Foundation
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

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

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich for a law firm.
  2. No visible forms collecting personal data on homepage.
  3. Social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn.
  4. No cookie consent banner or explicit cookie policy found.
  5. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure.
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which is unusual and warrants monitoring.
  7. Multiple office locations with phone numbers and addresses clearly listed.
  8. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  9. No signs of adult or inappropriate content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a WordPress CMS with Foundation CSS framework and jQuery libraries, indicating a modern and maintainable tech stack. SEO is enhanced via Yoast plugin with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate with some optimization possible. Mobile responsiveness is good, but accessibility is basic. No major technical debt or vulnerabilities were detected in the visible code. Hosting provider details are not explicit. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs effectively with opportunities for further optimization.
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 wbklaw.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 wbklaw.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.