Skip to main content

Security report for wipro.com

Wipro · Technology · India

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Wipro is a mature, global enterprise specializing in digital transformation and IT services, offering a broad portfolio including cloud, AI, cybersecurity, and consulting. The website reflects a professional and content-rich digital presence targeting enterprise clients worldwide. Technically, the site uses modern marketing and analytics technologies and is hosted on AWS with Adobe Experience Manager CMS. However, critical security issues exist due to an invalid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS protocol support, which significantly impacts the security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the site demonstrates strong business credibility but requires urgent remediation of SSL and TLS configurations to ensure secure user interactions.

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

6 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

    • 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

  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

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

Keep watching wipro.com

This scan found 14 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
0
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
53

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 wipro.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
104,390
Employees
9,066
Customers
62,798
Third parties
32,526
Weak passwords
11%

Latest record dated 2026-06-19 · 349 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 wipro.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –wipfs66.wipro.com2026-06-19
  • –sts.wipro.com2026-06-19
  • –sts.wipro.com2026-06-18
  • –wipro.com2026-06-18
  • –wipfs01.wipro.com2026-06-18

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

Wipro operates as a leading IT services provider with a diversified service portfolio across multiple industries including technology, finance, energy, and healthcare. The business model is B2B consulting and managed services with a global footprint. The website content and structured data confirm a focus on enterprise clients seeking digital transformation solutions. The company has a strong brand presence and uses advanced marketing tools to engage customers. The domain age and WHOIS data confirm a long-standing and legitimate business operation. No suspicious domains or privacy protection obfuscation is present, supporting high trustworthiness.

Security posture

The website implements several security headers such as CSP, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS directives, indicating awareness of security best practices. However, the SSL certificate is invalid or missing, and no TLS protocols are enabled, which is a critical vulnerability exposing users to potential interception and trust issues. OCSP stapling and session resumption are disabled, reducing performance and security. No explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is found, which limits transparency in security management. Privacy policies and cookie consent are well implemented, supporting regulatory compliance. Immediate SSL/TLS remediation is recommended to improve security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS securely.
  2. Enable TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols and disable deprecated versions.
  3. Configure HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload flags to enforce HTTPS.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to enhance security and performance.
  5. Publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and trust.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including jQuery, Adobe Launch, Google Tag Manager, Marketo forms, Typekit fonts, Vimeo and JW Player for media. It is built on Adobe Experience Manager CMS and hosted on Amazon AWS infrastructure. The site is mobile optimized with good SEO and accessibility basics. Performance data is unavailable, but the use of CDNs and asynchronous scripts suggests moderate to good performance. The invalid SSL configuration is a major technical risk. The site integrates multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools, indicating a mature digital marketing strategy.
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 wipro.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 wipro.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.