Skip to main content

Security report for yaelconsulting.com

Yael Consulting · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Yael Consulting is a specialized online marketing consultancy focusing on Google Ads and paid search marketing services. The company positions itself as a top expert with proprietary PPC technology and a client-centric approach, offering services such as free audits and rapid account optimization. The website is professionally designed with rich content including testimonials and video case studies, targeting businesses seeking to improve their paid advertising ROI. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern JavaScript libraries and performance optimizations, ensuring fast load times and excellent mobile responsiveness. Security posture is good with HTTPS and some best practices, but lacks explicit security headers and documented policies. WHOIS data is unavailable, raising some concerns about domain legitimacy, though the website content supports a credible business presence. Privacy and cookie policies are missing, indicating compliance gaps. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence but should improve transparency and security documentation.

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

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 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 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 yaelconsulting.com

This scan found 20 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
75
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
75

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 operates in the technology sector, specifically digital marketing and PPC consulting. It targets small to medium businesses looking for expert Google Ads management and optimization. The business model is service-based consulting with a focus on delivering measurable ROI and proprietary technology advantages. Market positioning is strong with claims of rapid results, exclusive client verticals, and high-touch service. The company leverages client testimonials and case studies to build trust. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified. The firm appears to be small-sized, founded in 2011, with a consistent brand and professional online presence. The absence of registrant data in WHOIS is a potential risk factor. The company uses multiple marketing and analytics tools to optimize campaigns and track performance.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses nonce attributes in scripts to mitigate injection risks. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are recommended to enhance security. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The site integrates Google reCAPTCHA for form protection, indicating attention to bot mitigation. There is no public security policy or incident response information, which limits transparency and readiness perception. The missing WHOIS data reduces trust in domain ownership authenticity. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved with additional headers, documented policies, and incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publicly display comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate readiness and transparency.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure legitimacy and build trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Yael Consulting
Description
Yael Consulting provides online marketing consultant and Paid Search Help with experience in organic optimization, paid search marketing as an Adwords consultant and New York SEM.
Key services
Google Ads consulting, Paid search marketing, PPC campaign management, Proprietary PPC software for keyword research, Free 15-minute audits
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, WP Rocket, Google Tag Manager, Matomo A/B Testing, Slick Carousel, GSAP, Glightbox
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of nonce attributes in scripts
  • Google reCAPTCHA integration

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Tracking pixels
Matomo
Marketing tools
Matomo A/B Testing
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional consulting firm specializing in Google Ads and paid search marketing.
  2. Content is rich with client testimonials, case studies, and proprietary technology claims.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  4. Contact information includes a phone number and contact forms but no email addresses explicitly found.
  5. No security policy or incident response information is provided.
  6. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which is a concern for domain legitimacy.
  7. Website uses modern technologies and good SEO practices.
  8. No adult or questionable content detected.
  9. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern tech stack including jQuery, GSAP, Slick Carousel, and WP Rocket for performance optimization. It uses Google Tag Manager and Matomo for analytics and A/B testing. The site is well-optimized for SEO with proper meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. Mobile optimization is excellent with responsive design and adaptive images. Performance is fast due to caching and lazy loading techniques. Accessibility is good with semantic HTML and ARIA roles. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable online 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 yaelconsulting.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 yaelconsulting.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.