Skip to main content

Security report for wearexyz.com

XYZ · Media · United States

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

XYZ is a creative visual production agency based in San Francisco specializing in 3D rendering, photography, retouching, video, motion graphics, and other visual content creation services. The company partners with notable brands to deliver compelling content and experiences that drive results. Their website showcases a strong portfolio of industry-leading clients, reflecting a solid market position in the media and creative production sector. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Elementor and leverages modern JavaScript libraries and third-party services such as Vimeo and Google Analytics. Hosting is provided by WP Engine with Cloudflare as a CDN, indicating a professional infrastructure. However, the site lacks a valid SSL certificate and proper HTTPS configuration, which is a critical security concern. Security headers are minimal, and no advanced security policies or incident response contacts are found. Privacy and cookie policies are absent, which may impact compliance with GDPR and other regulations. Overall, the site presents a professional business front but requires urgent improvements in security and privacy compliance to reduce risk and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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 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';…

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

Keep watching wearexyz.com

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
0
Security headers
25
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
43

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

XYZ operates as a specialized creative agency targeting brands seeking high-quality visual production services. Their business model focuses on project-based partnerships with clients in various industries, leveraging creative storytelling and advanced visual techniques. The presence of high-profile clients and a well-designed website indicates a competitive advantage and strong market presence. The company uses Google Tag Manager and Analytics for marketing insights and tracks user engagement moderately. Recruitment is managed via a third-party platform, indicating structured HR processes. The company’s digital footprint is consistent and professional, supporting growth and client acquisition strategies.

Security posture

The website’s security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS enforcement, exposing users to potential data interception risks. Security headers are limited, and advanced protections like HSTS, OCSP stapling, and session resumption are not enabled. No explicit security policies or incident response contacts are published, which may hinder timely vulnerability reporting and mitigation. While no known vulnerabilities or malware are detected, the lack of encryption and security best practices represents a significant risk to business operations and client trust. Immediate remediation is recommended to align with industry standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL certificate to enable HTTPS site-wide.
  2. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear user consent mechanisms.
  3. Enhance security headers including full HSTS with preload and includeSubDomains.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.
  5. Regularly audit and update all third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder, utilizing popular JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Owl Carousel, and Plyr for media handling. Hosting is managed by WP Engine with Cloudflare CDN, providing scalability and performance benefits. However, performance metrics are missing or zero, indicating potential issues with load time measurement or optimization. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Technical debt appears low but the lack of SSL and incomplete security configurations pose operational risks. Opportunities exist to improve performance monitoring and accessibility compliance.
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 wearexyz.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 wearexyz.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.