AI Readiness Assessment
https://www.eclecticiq.com
Assessed2026-07-31
Reference0731/ECL/02
IndustryTechnology and software
Scale187 / 1,742
TrafficNAAwaiting live domain connection, provided as part of service deployment.
Regulated sectorNone found
Listed companyNot established
Manual equivalent13 days · £7,956estimate only
Foundations assessed now ยท the automated tests
Your Digital Doorway
PeopleAI systems
AI readiness ยท Pages
32.3%
AI readiness ยท PDFs
0.0%
Misinformation ยท Pages
Extremely likely
Misinformation ยท PDFs
Likely
0%25%50%75%100%
Governancestage 2 ยท not assessed yet...more
64 judgements need a named person in the organisation to confirm, because they turn on what you know to be true rather than anything measurement can settle: whether a claim is supported, whether a page is still current, which of two versions is the one to quote. In order, they cover: who is answerable for this content; is it still true today; can each claim be backed; does our published content agree; will the right meaning come across; can someone reach it and act on it. An answer recorded against each, with a name and a date, is what turns published content into governed content.
Visibilitystage 3 ยท not assessed yet...more
Once the foundations are sound and the content is governed, the visibility stage measures how AI systems and agents actually find the estate: which pages they reach, how often, and how the organisation is represented when they answer questions about it, tracked over time. Building visibility on unconfirmed foundations only amplifies whatever is wrong, which is why it comes last.
Key findings ยท AI readiness
How much of your content is reachable and readable, rather than blocked, buried or missing. Higher is better.
AI readiness is low.the content can be reached, but the way the pages are built keeps much of it from being read cleanly.
What is holding it back
- Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text.37 pages
- The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters.36 pages
- A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one.20 pages
- A linked document that cannot be fetched is detail out of reach: whatever it held cannot be read or checked by anyone, so answers that lean on it are built without it, and the broken link itself reads as a site not being kept.1 document
Key findings ยท Misinformation
Where your content could lead an AI system to state something incorrect. Only direct routes to a wrong answer count here.
Misinformation risk is high.The pages read as extremely likely and the documents as likely to cause it, which is why the risk reads as high.
What could cause it
- Duplicates collapse to a single surviving version, and which one survives is not the publisher's choice.pages
- When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over.pages
- When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate.pages
- A linked document that cannot be fetched is detail out of reach: whatever it held cannot be read or checked by anyone, so answers that lean on it are built without it, and the broken link itself reads as a site not being kept.documents
▸Overall findings what makes up the figures · click to view
The front door1 of 15 AI systems turned away at the door. Content behind the door cannot be read by whoever is refused, and that holds the figures down. The full picture is the Digital doorway below.
The site as a whole · 10.6%the estate's shared machinery measures 88.2% built. The figure shown is lower because the assessment found repeated pages, boilerplate-dominated near-duplicate pages, which raise the chance of an answer being wrong, and a direct route to a wrong answer caps what can be relied on, however well built. The evidence for each finding is under Site infrastructure below.
Pages · 32.3%the average of 37 pages, each scored on its own build and its own misinformation exposure; today they range 8.6% to 55.5%. Each page's evidence is under Pages considered below.
Documents · 0.0%the average of 1 documents, scored the same way; today they range 0.0% to 0.0%. 1 of them could not be fetched at all, the link from the site is broken, and a document nobody can read measures 0%. Each document's evidence is under PDF documents below.
▸Digital doorway measured at the front door · click to view
Anyone asking for this site, a person on a phone or an AI system building an answer, is either let in or turned away, in milliseconds, by machinery most organisations never see. An AI system refused here gets nothing at all: to that system the organisation simply does not answer.
The door changes without notice: a security setting, a network change or a new crawler policy can close it silently. It is measured live on the day of assessment, and it is worth watching continuously rather than once.
People
4 out of 4 served
AI systems
1 out of 15 turned away
People are served in full; 1 of the 15 AI systems is turned away at the door.
Whether the estate can be reached and read at all: access rules, links, redirects, sitemap, transport.
▸The site as a whole 10.6% Extremely likely 5 out of 24
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS03 | warning | 1 of the 15 AI crawlers asking for the site is refused by the security layer in front of it; the other 14 are served. The refusal falls on that service alone. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What we check The same page loads for a browser but is refused when the request names itself as an AI service. What good looks like The page returns the same response to a named AI service as to a browser, with no edge block. Why it matters The block sits in front of the site and leaves no trace in its own logs, so the estate is closed off unnoticed. What we found on this page 1 of the 15 AI crawlers asking for the site is refused by the security layer in front of it; the other 14 are served. The refusal falls on that service alone. The evidence, taken from the page as served Each crawler's own request to the entry page, and the status it received
Hostwww.eclecticiq.com · resolves to 199.60.103.31, 199.60.103.225 · Cloudflare
Address trailwww.eclecticiq.com › 2831317.group17.sites.hubspot.net › group17.sites.hscoscdn10.net
Checked2026-07-31 16:40 UTC · request sent from 10.100.100.212 (our checker)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| DS16 | fail | 32 URL group(s) are reachable under more than one form (case, trailing slash, or query variants) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What we check The same page served at several addresses, varying by capitals, slashes or query strings. What good looks like Each page is served at a single address, not several varying by capitals, slashes or query strings. Why it matters The site cedes the choice of which address is stored and cited, so links and credit scatter across the variants. What we found on this page 32 URL group(s) are reachable under more than one form (case, trailing slash, or query variants) The evidence, taken from the page as served The URLs that serve the same page under more than one form
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page is served at a single address, not several varying by capitals, slashes or query strings. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MX12 | fail | 2 pair(s) of pages carry near-identical text (at least 90% of the same words) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What we check Distinct URLs among the assessed pages that carry near-identical body text. What good looks like No two assessed pages carry near-identical body text. Why it matters Duplicates collapse to a single surviving version, and which one survives is not the publisher's choice. What we found on this page 2 pair(s) of pages carry near-identical text (at least 90% of the same words) The evidence, taken from the page as served Each page pair whose visible text is near-identical (at least 90% shared vocabulary)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: no two assessed pages carry near-identical body text. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | 8 page(s) read as near-identical to other pages in the text a machine ingests (up to 94% shared), but the overlap is shared navigation and footer rather than content: the worst affected page has 50 words of its own out of 316. Distinct pages can then be taken as duplicates and the real content passed over; the pages are listed in the view. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page 8 page(s) read as near-identical to other pages in the text a machine ingests (up to 94% shared), but the overlap is shared navigation and footer rather than content: the worst affected page has 50 words of its own out of 316. Distinct pages can then be taken as duplicates and the real content passed over; the pages are listed in the view. The evidence, taken from the page as served Pages whose own words are lost in a shared navigation and footer (near-identical to a machine)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| CT07 | warning | 3 page title(s) are used on more than one page: โNews & Awardsโ, โResourcesโ, โThreat Intelligence Platformโ; the pages are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
What we check Any title string that is shared by more than one of the assessed pages. What good looks like Each assessed page carries its own distinct title. Why it matters Pages sharing one title carry the same label, so nothing distinguishes them at the point one is picked. What we found on this page 3 page title(s) are used on more than one page: โNews & Awardsโ, โResourcesโ, โThreat Intelligence Platformโ; the pages are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served The pages that share a title, grouped by the title they share
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Passing checks are omitted here; the full record is in the exports.
Pages considered 37 pages
The highest-priority pages, chosen from the site's own signals of importance.
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com 55.5% Likely 10 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The threat intelligence platform that understands your business</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Center is a Cyber Threat Intelligence tool that helps with threat hunting, threat analysis, incident response, and more. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.oโฆ | |||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The threat intelligence platform that understands your business</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Center is a Cyber Threat Intelligence tool that helps with threat hunting, threat analysis, incident response, and more. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.oโฆ | |||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The threat intelligence platform that understands your business</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Center is a Cyber Threat Intelligence tool that helps with threat hunting, threat analysis, incident response, and more. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.oโฆ | |||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-red text-white"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Book a demo</spโฆ <a href="https://blog.eclecticiq.com/eclecticiq-mcp-server?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read blog</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3โฆ <a href="https://blog.eclecticiq.com/the-ai-arms-race-how-adversaries-are-weaponizing-ai-for-speed-and-scale?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/intelligent-mapping-of-cti-to-mitre-attck-automating-ttp-classification-with-ai?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/advanced-static-analysis-real-time-threat-intelligence-for-faster-triage?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flexโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 The Threat Intelligence Platform that understands your business H2 Proactive threat management that leads to better security H2 How our TIP helps your team H3 CTI Analysts H3 SOC Analysts H3 Cybersecurity Leaders and CISO H3 MSSPs H2 What sets us apart H3 Unified command center H3 Adaptive threat detection H3 Rapid threat response H3 Intelligence driven action H2 Words from our customers H2 Latest blogs and key resources H3 EclecticIQ MCP Server: Connect your AI agents directly to your threat intelligen H3 The AI Arms Race:ย How Adversaries are Weaponizing AI for Speed and Scale H3 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A H3 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H2 As featured in H2 Talk to one of our experts H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 65 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 65 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||
| AJ08 | warning | focus order: the first 12 Tab stops do not follow document order | |||||||||
What we check Whether pressing Tab moves through the page in the order its content is written. What good looks like Pressing Tab moves through the page in the order its content is written. Why it matters The keyboard jumps around the page out of sequence, so a form is worked through in an order nobody intended. What we found on this page focus order: the first 12 Tab stops do not follow document order The evidence, taken from the page as served How the keyboard moves through this page
Read on the page once its scripts had run, following the keyboard from the top.
| |||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?type=case+study&hsLang=en 29.9% Very likely 16 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Enhancing Triage and Collaboration for Global Banking Security level jumped H3 EclecticIQ Empowers a National CERTโs Collaborative Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 EclecticIQ Intelligence Platform Makes Threat Intelligence Actionable for Financ H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/enhancing-triage-and-collaboration-for-global-banking-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Downโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/eclecticiq-empowers-a-national-certs-collaborative-threat-intelligence-sharing-community" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/a-financial-heavyweight-makes-threat-intelligence-actionable-with-eclecticiq" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Enhancing Triage and Collaboration for Global Banking Security level jumped H3 EclecticIQ Empowers a National CERTโs Collaborative Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 EclecticIQ Intelligence Platform Makes Threat Intelligence Actionable for Financ H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2175 characters delivered, 2375 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2175 characters delivered, 2375 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 2175 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 2375. 14% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Resources Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreebusinessemailforminformationpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswillyour
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.92 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 14% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.92 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 57 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 57 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 316 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 94% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 316 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 94% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?type=product+sheet&hsLang=en 29.9% Very likely 16 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Threat Intelligence Feeds level jumped H3 Threat Intelligence Platform H3 Threat Intelligence Browser Extension H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 5 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โthreat intelligence browser extensionโ and 2 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 5 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โthreat intelligence browser extensionโ and 2 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-platform" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/platform.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Platform</span> </a> <a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-browser-extension" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/browser.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</span> </a> <a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-feeds" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/feeds.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Feeds</span> </a> <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-feeds" class="mt-6 xl:mt-10 mb-10 xl:mb-16"> <h3 class="faux-h6 text-lg leading-tight">Threat Intelligence Feeds</h3> </a> <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-feeds" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-platform-product-sheet" class="mt-6 xl:mt-10 mb-10 xl:mb-16"> <h3 class="faux-h6 text-lg leading-tight">Threat Intelligence Platform</h3> </a> <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-platform-product-sheet" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-browser-extension" class="mt-6 xl:mt-10 mb-10 xl:mb-16"> <h3 class="faux-h6 text-lg leading-tight">Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</h3> </a> <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-browser-extension" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="hโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Threat Intelligence Feeds level jumped H3 Threat Intelligence Platform H3 Threat Intelligence Browser Extension H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 16% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2041 characters delivered, 2241 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 16% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2041 characters delivered, 2241 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 2041 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 2241. 16% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Resources Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreebusinessemailforminformationpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswillyour
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 16% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.91 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 16% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.91 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 57 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 57 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 301 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 94% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 301 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 94% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?type=solution+brief&hsLang=en 29.9% Very likely 16 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Censys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข level jumped H3 Bluesky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Modat Integration with EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Twitter (X) and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Telegram and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ReversingLabs Spectra Analyze and Spectra Intelligence Integration with Eclectic H3 VMRay UniqueSignal and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Bitdefender Sandbox and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Qualys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Silobreaker and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Microsoft Sentinel and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Intel 471 and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Kaspersky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Recorded Future and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Flashpoint and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Splunk and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 IBM Security and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Google Chronicle and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Cortex XSOAR and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ServiceNow and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/censys-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlnโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/bluesky-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/modat-integration-with-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</spaโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/twitter-x-channel-monitoring-and-intelligence-extraction-for-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span classโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/telegram-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/reversinglabs-spectra-analyze-and-spectra-intelligence-integration-with-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/vmray-uniquesignal-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</spaโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/bitdefender-sandbox-and-eclecticiq" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="httpโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/qualys-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlnโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Censys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข level jumped H3 Bluesky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Modat Integration with EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Twitter (X) and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Telegram and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ReversingLabs Spectra Analyze and Spectra Intelligence Integration with Eclectic H3 VMRay UniqueSignal and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Bitdefender Sandbox and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Qualys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Silobreaker and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Microsoft Sentinel and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Intel 471 and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Kaspersky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Recorded Future and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Flashpoint and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Splunk and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 IBM Security and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Google Chronicle and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Cortex XSOAR and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ServiceNow and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (3712 characters delivered, 3912 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (3712 characters delivered, 3912 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 3712 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 3912. 12% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Resources Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreebusinessemailforminformationpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswillyour
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.95 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 12% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.95 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 93 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 93 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 331 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 90% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 331 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 90% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?type=webinar&hsLang=en 50.4% Likely 15 out of 57
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A level jumped H3 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H3 The Weaponization of AI & Implications for Defenders H3 AI-Powered CTI Excellence: Transforming European Cybersecurity Operations H3 Strategic Intelligence: Translating APAC Threats to Business Risk H3 The Context Advantage: from Drowning in Data to Decisive Defense H3 Sandwormโs Cyber Espionage: Russiaโs GRU-Linked APT Uses Pirated Software in Ukr H3 Needle-Sharp CTI: AI for Business-Aligned Threats H3 Building a Strong CTI Foundation H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โwatchโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โwatchโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/intelligent-mapping-of-cti-to-mitre-attck-automating-ttp-classification-with-ai" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-noโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/advanced-static-analysis-real-time-threat-intelligence-for-faster-triage" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trunโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/the-weaponization-of-ai-implications-for-defenders" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Watch</span> <svโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/ai-powered-cti-excellence-transforming-european-cybersecurity-operations" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trunโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/strategic-intelligence-translating-apac-threats-to-business-risk" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Waโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/the-context-advantage-from-drowning-in-data-to-decisive-defense" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Watโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/needle-sharp-cti-ai-for-business-aligned-threats-0" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Watch</span> <svโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/needle-sharp-cti-ai-for-business-aligned-threats" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Watch</span> <svg โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/eclecticiq-webinar-building-a-strong-cti-foundation" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Watch</span> <sโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A level jumped H3 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H3 The Weaponization of AI & Implications for Defenders H3 AI-Powered CTI Excellence: Transforming European Cybersecurity Operations H3 Strategic Intelligence: Translating APAC Threats to Business Risk H3 The Context Advantage: from Drowning in Data to Decisive Defense H3 Sandwormโs Cyber Espionage: Russiaโs GRU-Linked APT Uses Pirated Software in Ukr H3 Needle-Sharp CTI: AI for Business-Aligned Threats H3 Building a Strong CTI Foundation H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2674 characters delivered, 2874 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2674 characters delivered, 2874 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 2674 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 2874. 10% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Resources Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreeemailforminformationpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswillyour
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.93 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.93 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 69 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 69 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?type=white+paper&hsLang=en 50.4% Likely 15 out of 57
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 The information age battlefield: Combining CTI & Information Operations Intellig level jumped H3 An AI-driven threat intelligence program H3 A Stakeholder-centric Approach to Building a High-performing CTI Practice H3 Beyond the IOC: Elevating Threat Intelligence with Tactics, Techniques, and Proc H3 STIX 2.1 and Beyond: The Essential Role of STIX in CTI Operations H3 Strengthening Europeโs cybersecurity future: A strategic imperative H3 SilkSpecter exposed: Inside a global phishing operation H3 The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 Accelerate Incident Response with Threat Intelligence H3 Augment Your SOC with Human-Led Threat Intelligence H3 CTI Maturity-driven Threat Intelligence Platform Buyerโs Guide H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/the-information-age-battlefield" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="http://โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/an-ai-driven-threat-intelligence-program" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlnsโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/a-stakeholder-centric-approach-to-building-a-high-performing-cti-practice" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/beyond-the-ioc-elevating-threat-intelligence-with-tactics-techniques-and-procedures-ttps" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/stix-2.1-and-beyond" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/strengthening-europes-cybersecurity-future-a-strategic-imperative" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Dโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/silkspecter-exposed-inside-a-global-phishing-operation" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</spโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/the-path-to-pre-emptive-cti-operations" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/accelerate-incident-response-with-threat-intelligence" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</spaโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 The information age battlefield: Combining CTI & Information Operations Intellig level jumped H3 An AI-driven threat intelligence program H3 A Stakeholder-centric Approach to Building a High-performing CTI Practice H3 Beyond the IOC: Elevating Threat Intelligence with Tactics, Techniques, and Proc H3 STIX 2.1 and Beyond: The Essential Role of STIX in CTI Operations H3 Strengthening Europeโs cybersecurity future: A strategic imperative H3 SilkSpecter exposed: Inside a global phishing operation H3 The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 Accelerate Incident Response with Threat Intelligence H3 Augment Your SOC with Human-Led Threat Intelligence H3 CTI Maturity-driven Threat Intelligence Platform Buyerโs Guide H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2946 characters delivered, 3146 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (2946 characters delivered, 3146 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 2946 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 3146. 10% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Resources Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources …
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreebusinessemailformpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswill
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.94 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 10% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.94 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 73 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 73 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/news?hsLang=en 51.5% Likely 13 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Press release overview</title> <meta name="description" content="Find here all official press releases of EclecticIQ"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}ifโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Press Releases H3 EclecticIQ appoints James OโConnor as Chief Technology Officer to drive next pha level jumped H3 Organisations gain clearer context and faster decision-making in the fight again H3 EclecticIQ launches first-of-its-kind doctrine-aligned Threat Intelligence Platf H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Chief Marketing Officer and Chief Revenue Officerย to Drive N H3 Businesses to gain speed, clarity and flexibility in combating cyber threats as H3 EclecticIQ drives AsiaโPacific expansion with strategic appointment H3 EclecticIQ contributes cyber threat intelligence expertise to NATO CCDCOE report H3 European Consortium Awarded Digital Europe Program Grant to Enhance AI-driven Cy H3 EclecticIQ and TeamT5 Join Forces to Combat Asia-Pacific Cyber Threats with Enha H3 Businesses empowered to combat cybersecurity threats through launch of EclecticI H3 EclecticIQ Welcomes Cybersecurity Veteran Rich Wickersham to its Supervisory Boa H3 EclecticIQ Paves the Way for Its AI-Embedded Threat Intelligence Platform H3 EclecticIQ Introduces Threat Scout H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Cody Barrow as Its New CEO H3 EclecticIQ In Consortium Selected by European Commission to Enhance Europe's Cyb H3 EclecticIQ sells Endpoint Detection talent and software capabilities to ReliaQue H3 EclecticIQ launches version 3.0 of its flagship threat intelligence platform, In H3 CyberSecurity Malaysia, EclecticIQ, and Syntx Sign MOU to Build Cyber Threat Int H3 AaDya Security Partners with EclecticIQ to Deliver Next Generation Endpoint Prot H3 EclecticIQ Partners with Sopra Steria Group H3 Dutch Security TechFund Invests in Innovative Cybersecurity Leader EclecticIQ H3 Dutch Scale-up EclecticIQ Receives โฌ15โฏMillion in EU Financing to Boost Developm H3 EclecticIQ Joins Health-ISAC Navigatorโข Program H3 EclecticIQ Endpoint Response 3.0 Released โ Improve Cyberdefense with Real-Time H3 EclecticIQ Launches New Platform and Vision that Re-imagines How Threat Intellig H3 EclecticIQ Establishes Engineering Hub in Bengaluru, India H3 ASM Technologies partners with Netherlands based EclecticIQ H3 Devo Platform Selected to Power New EclecticIQ XDR H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Jay Zimmet as Chief Revenue Officer H3 EclecticIQ Partners with ACDS to Expand Managed Security Service Offering H3 EclecticIQ raises โฌ20 million in Series C funding H3 Press release: EclecticIQ launches remote, instructor-led training for CTI analy H3 Joint Threat Intelligence investigation by EclecticIQ and ThreatFabric H3 New CTI partnership between Z-Cert and EclecticIQ to protect healthcare institut H3 PolyLogyx joins EclecticIQ for next-gen CTI solutions H3 Deal for faster time-to-release for intelligence-powered security products H3 EclecticIQ Browser Extension for CTI analysts H3 Continued growth for EclecticIQ in 2019 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand Threat H3 EclecticIQ strengthens leadership team H3 EclecticIQ joins forces with IXTEL in UAE H3 EclecticIQ Recognized in Gartner 2019 Market Guide for SOAR H3 Global Resilience Federation and EclecticIQ Partnership for Platform Access H3 EclecticIQ listed in Gartner Market Guide for Security Threat Intelligence 2019 H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ Ink Middle East Partnership H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for critical infrastructures with new H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 EclecticIQ delivers curated and structured intelligence with Fusion Center Intel H3 Michael Seguinot joins EclecticIQ to drive forward North American Channel Strate H3 EclecticIQ Fusion Center integrates with MITRE's ATT&CK Framework H3 EclecticIQ joins forces with Pink Elephant South Africa to further drive interna H3 EclecticIQ establishes North American Headquarters H3 EclecticIQ lands Series-B investment of โฌ14 million H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.0 Redefines Threat Analysis with Intelligence Reporting, N H3 [German] EclecticIQ: Neueinstellungen stรคrken Prรคsenz in DACH H3 EclecticIQ cited in two recent Gartner reports on Security Threat Intelligence H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ partner to deliver threat intelligence on Russian-langua H3 Former Head of CERT-EU joins EclecticIQ Board of Directors H3 Press release: EclecticIQ simplifies threat intelligence with EclecticIQ Fusion H3 Joint press release EclecticIQ and SenseCy H3 Soltra is winding down, is this the end of STIX/TAXII? H3 EclecticIQ boosts information sharing for New Zealand Internet Task Force H3 Protect against identified Zero-Day threats with Exodus Intelligence and Eclecti H3 EclecticIQ wins the Deloitte FAST50 Rising Star award H3 EclecticIQ Platform mentioned by Gartner in recent Advice on Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Announces Bi-directional Threat Intelligence Integration with HPE Sec H3 EclecticIQ presents Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Model H3 EclecticIQ expands its UK presence H3 EclecticIQ and Cosive partnership Cyber Threat Intelligence H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ and Intel 471 Partnership Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Raises 5.5 Million Euro for Enterprise-Ready Cyber Threat Intelligenc H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ Joins FS-ISAC as an Affiliate H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ Presents "Cyber Threat Management Best Practices" Work H3 A New Weapon in the Fight Against Cyber Criminals H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Press release overview</title> <meta name="description" content="Find here all official press releases of EclecticIQ"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}ifโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Press release overview</title> <meta name="description" content="Find here all official press releases of EclecticIQ"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}ifโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Press release overview</title> <meta name="description" content="Find here all official press releases of EclecticIQ"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}ifโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-appoints-james-oconnor-as-chief-technology-officer-to-drive-next-phase-of-product-scale-and-innovation" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/organisations-gain-clearer-context-and-faster-decision-making-in-the-fight-against-cyber-threats-with-eclecticiq-intelligence-center-3.7" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold textโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-launches-first-of-its-kind-doctrine-aligned-threat-intelligence-platform-for-defence-and-national-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-appoints-chief-marketing-officer-and-chief-revenue-officer-to-drive-next-phase-of-growth" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/businesses-to-gain-speed-clarity-and-flexibility-in-combating-cyber-threats-as-eclecticiq-launches-next-generation-platform" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-autโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-drives-asia-pacific-expansion-with-strategic-appointment" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Reโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-contributes-cyber-threat-intelligence-expertise-to-nato-report-on-maritime-port-infrastructure-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadingโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/european-consortium-awarded-digital-europe-program-grant-to-enhance-ai-driven-cyber-threat-intelligence-capabilities" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadiโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-and-teamt5-join-forces-to-combat-asia-pacific-cyber-threats-with-enhanced-intelligence-capabilities" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tigโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Press Releases H3 EclecticIQ appoints James OโConnor as Chief Technology Officer to drive next pha level jumped H3 Organisations gain clearer context and faster decision-making in the fight again H3 EclecticIQ launches first-of-its-kind doctrine-aligned Threat Intelligence Platf H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Chief Marketing Officer and Chief Revenue Officerย to Drive N H3 Businesses to gain speed, clarity and flexibility in combating cyber threats as H3 EclecticIQ drives AsiaโPacific expansion with strategic appointment H3 EclecticIQ contributes cyber threat intelligence expertise to NATO CCDCOE report H3 European Consortium Awarded Digital Europe Program Grant to Enhance AI-driven Cy H3 EclecticIQ and TeamT5 Join Forces to Combat Asia-Pacific Cyber Threats with Enha H3 Businesses empowered to combat cybersecurity threats through launch of EclecticI H3 EclecticIQ Welcomes Cybersecurity Veteran Rich Wickersham to its Supervisory Boa H3 EclecticIQ Paves the Way for Its AI-Embedded Threat Intelligence Platform H3 EclecticIQ Introduces Threat Scout H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Cody Barrow as Its New CEO H3 EclecticIQ In Consortium Selected by European Commission to Enhance Europe's Cyb H3 EclecticIQ sells Endpoint Detection talent and software capabilities to ReliaQue H3 EclecticIQ launches version 3.0 of its flagship threat intelligence platform, In H3 CyberSecurity Malaysia, EclecticIQ, and Syntx Sign MOU to Build Cyber Threat Int H3 AaDya Security Partners with EclecticIQ to Deliver Next Generation Endpoint Prot H3 EclecticIQ Partners with Sopra Steria Group H3 Dutch Security TechFund Invests in Innovative Cybersecurity Leader EclecticIQ H3 Dutch Scale-up EclecticIQ Receives โฌ15โฏMillion in EU Financing to Boost Developm H3 EclecticIQ Joins Health-ISAC Navigatorโข Program H3 EclecticIQ Endpoint Response 3.0 Released โ Improve Cyberdefense with Real-Time H3 EclecticIQ Launches New Platform and Vision that Re-imagines How Threat Intellig H3 EclecticIQ Establishes Engineering Hub in Bengaluru, India H3 ASM Technologies partners with Netherlands based EclecticIQ H3 Devo Platform Selected to Power New EclecticIQ XDR H3 EclecticIQ Appoints Jay Zimmet as Chief Revenue Officer H3 EclecticIQ Partners with ACDS to Expand Managed Security Service Offering H3 EclecticIQ raises โฌ20 million in Series C funding H3 Press release: EclecticIQ launches remote, instructor-led training for CTI analy H3 Joint Threat Intelligence investigation by EclecticIQ and ThreatFabric H3 New CTI partnership between Z-Cert and EclecticIQ to protect healthcare institut H3 PolyLogyx joins EclecticIQ for next-gen CTI solutions H3 Deal for faster time-to-release for intelligence-powered security products H3 EclecticIQ Browser Extension for CTI analysts H3 Continued growth for EclecticIQ in 2019 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand Threat H3 EclecticIQ strengthens leadership team H3 EclecticIQ joins forces with IXTEL in UAE H3 EclecticIQ Recognized in Gartner 2019 Market Guide for SOAR H3 Global Resilience Federation and EclecticIQ Partnership for Platform Access H3 EclecticIQ listed in Gartner Market Guide for Security Threat Intelligence 2019 H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ Ink Middle East Partnership H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for critical infrastructures with new H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 EclecticIQ delivers curated and structured intelligence with Fusion Center Intel H3 Michael Seguinot joins EclecticIQ to drive forward North American Channel Strate H3 EclecticIQ Fusion Center integrates with MITRE's ATT&CK Framework H3 EclecticIQ joins forces with Pink Elephant South Africa to further drive interna H3 EclecticIQ establishes North American Headquarters H3 EclecticIQ lands Series-B investment of โฌ14 million H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.0 Redefines Threat Analysis with Intelligence Reporting, N H3 [German] EclecticIQ: Neueinstellungen stรคrken Prรคsenz in DACH H3 EclecticIQ cited in two recent Gartner reports on Security Threat Intelligence H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ partner to deliver threat intelligence on Russian-langua H3 Former Head of CERT-EU joins EclecticIQ Board of Directors H3 Press release: EclecticIQ simplifies threat intelligence with EclecticIQ Fusion H3 Joint press release EclecticIQ and SenseCy H3 Soltra is winding down, is this the end of STIX/TAXII? H3 EclecticIQ boosts information sharing for New Zealand Internet Task Force H3 Protect against identified Zero-Day threats with Exodus Intelligence and Eclecti H3 EclecticIQ wins the Deloitte FAST50 Rising Star award H3 EclecticIQ Platform mentioned by Gartner in recent Advice on Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Announces Bi-directional Threat Intelligence Integration with HPE Sec H3 EclecticIQ presents Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Model H3 EclecticIQ expands its UK presence H3 EclecticIQ and Cosive partnership Cyber Threat Intelligence H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ and Intel 471 Partnership Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Raises 5.5 Million Euro for Enterprise-Ready Cyber Threat Intelligenc H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ Joins FS-ISAC as an Affiliate H3 Press Release: EclecticIQ Presents "Cyber Threat Management Best Practices" Work H3 A New Weapon in the Fight Against Cyber Criminals H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ | |||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-appoints-james-oconnor-as-chief-technology-officer-to-drive-next-phase-of-product-scale-and-innovation" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/organisations-gain-clearer-context-and-faster-decision-making-in-the-fight-against-cyber-threats-with-eclecticiq-intelligence-center-3.7" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold textโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-launches-first-of-its-kind-doctrine-aligned-threat-intelligence-platform-for-defence-and-national-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-appoints-chief-marketing-officer-and-chief-revenue-officer-to-drive-next-phase-of-growth" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/businesses-to-gain-speed-clarity-and-flexibility-in-combating-cyber-threats-as-eclecticiq-launches-next-generation-platform" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-autโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-drives-asia-pacific-expansion-with-strategic-appointment" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Reโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-contributes-cyber-threat-intelligence-expertise-to-nato-report-on-maritime-port-infrastructure-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadingโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/european-consortium-awarded-digital-europe-program-grant-to-enhance-ai-driven-cyber-threat-intelligence-capabilities" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leadiโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/eclecticiq-and-teamt5-join-forces-to-combat-asia-pacific-cyber-threats-with-enhanced-intelligence-capabilities" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tigโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/news/businesses-empowered-to-combat-cybersecurity-threats-through-launch-of-eclecticiqs-ai-embedded-solution" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <sโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 77% of the page's text (8060 of 10441 characters) is not visible before interaction | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text is hidden behind a click or an expander before anyone interacts. What good looks like The page's text is visible as it loads, not held behind a click or an expander. Why it matters Half or more of the page's text is present but never shown, so what readers see and what it contains diverge. What we found on this page 77% of the page's text (8060 of 10441 characters) is not visible before interaction The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is hidden until something is clicked
Counted on the page once its scripts had run, before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 70 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 70 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/events?hsLang=en 9.3% Extremely likely 19 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Events</title> <meta name="description" content="Events"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaulโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 6 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 6 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Events</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 6 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 6 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Events"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Events H3 (no text) level jumped
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Events</title> <meta name="description" content="Events"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaulโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Events</title> <meta name="description" content="Events"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaulโฆ | |||||||||||||
| AR13 | warning | only 142 characters of this page read as its own content, so either the page is thin or its own words cannot be told apart from the parts repeated across the site | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's main content is marked off from the navigation and footer around it. What good looks like A main or article region marks the primary content off from the navigation and footer around it. Why it matters Pulling the page's text returns menus and legal footers mixed with the substance, so the answer arrives buried in noise. What we found on this page only 142 characters of this page read as its own content, so either the page is thin or its own words cannot be told apart from the parts repeated across the site The evidence, taken from the page as served The main text extracted from the page, as served
Events Meet the EclecticIQ team both in the real world and online: at conferences, meetups, summit, workshops or webinars. No upcoming events. | |||||||||||||
| CT24 | warning | the page's own content runs to 142 characters | |||||||||||
What we check The page holds enough main text to be substantive, measured against a 400 character floor. What good looks like The page holds enough main text to be substantive. Why it matters A page of a few sentences offers almost nothing to quote, so it adds little beyond its own existence. What we found on this page the page's own content runs to 142 characters The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The page's own content is the part it marks out as its main content; where it marks out none, the whole of its text is counted.
| |||||||||||||
| CT13 | fail | main content is 9% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text sits in the main content region rather than in surrounding furniture. What good looks like Most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. Why it matters When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate. What we found on this page main content is 9% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The rest is the menus, header and foot-of-page text that appear on other pages of the site as well.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Events</title> <meta name="description" content="Events"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaulโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Events H3 (no text) level jumped
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR03 | warning | 19% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (1570 characters delivered, 1770 once the page finishes building itself) | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's content exists only once JavaScript has run. What good looks like The page's content is present in the served HTML, so it does not depend on JavaScript to appear. Why it matters The page is fetched successfully but the answer is missing from what comes back, so the content is absent rather than wrong. What we found on this page 19% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered (1570 characters delivered, 1770 once the page finishes building itself) The evidence, taken from the page as served Content present only after JavaScript runs (absent from the served HTML)
The served HTML carries 1570 characters of text; after JavaScript runs the page carries 1770. 19% of the rendered page's words are absent from the HTML the server sends. What the server sends (raw HTML text, first 280 chars) Events Products Products Threat Intelligence Platform Threat Intelligence Browser Extension Threat Intelligence Feeds Use Cases Use Cases Defense TIP Alert Triage Incident Response Reporting AI Search Partners Partners Integration Partners Channel Partners Resources Resources Lib…
Words present only after JavaScript runs
accordanceacknowledgeaddressagreebusinessemailforminformationpersonalprocesssignsubmittingthatthisupdateswillyour
| |||||||||||||
| AR11 | warning | 19% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.89 of its finished size | |||||||||||
What we check The measured gap between the page as served and the page after the browser has built it. What good looks like The served page and the fully built page carry the same words, with little gap between them. Why it matters Two versions of the same page exist, and which words come back depends on which version was fetched. What we found on this page 19% of the words a person sees are missing from the page as first delivered, which is 0.89 of its finished size The evidence, taken from the page as served This page as first delivered, against the page once its scripts have run
Both were taken from the same request. The first is what the site sent; the second is what a person ends up looking at.
| |||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 59% of the page's text (1057 of 1770 characters) is not visible before interaction | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text is hidden behind a click or an expander before anyone interacts. What good looks like The page's text is visible as it loads, not held behind a click or an expander. Why it matters Half or more of the page's text is present but never shown, so what readers see and what it contains diverge. What we found on this page 59% of the page's text (1057 of 1770 characters) is not visible before interaction The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is hidden until something is clicked
Counted on the page once its scripts had run, before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 44 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 44 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 287 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 287 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-platform?hsLang=en 54.1% Likely 12 out of 59
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 172 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 172 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Intelligence Center: The AI-embedded Threat Intelligence Platform H2 What our Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) can do H3 1. Direction & planning H4 1. Direction & planning H3 2. Data collection H4 2. Data collection H3 3. Processing H4 3. Processing H3 4. Analysis H4 4. Analysis H3 5. Actioning & production H4 5. Actioning & production H3 6. Dissemination & feedback H4 6. Dissemination & feedback H2 How you can use our TIP H2 How our TIP helps your team H3 CTI Analysts H3 SOC Analysts H3 Cybersecurity Leaders and CISO H3 MSSPs H2 Learn more about Intelligence Center H3 Download the Threat Intelligence Platform product sheet H3 Read our latest blogs H3 Get access to our latest reports H2 Talk to one of our experts H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โlearn moreโ | |||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โlearn moreโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="https://blog.eclecticiq.com?type=intelligence-research&hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="httโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| AR12 | warning | 69% of the page's text (5981 of 8668 characters) is not visible before interaction | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text is hidden behind a click or an expander before anyone interacts. What good looks like The page's text is visible as it loads, not held behind a click or an expander. Why it matters Half or more of the page's text is present but never shown, so what readers see and what it contains diverge. What we found on this page 69% of the page's text (5981 of 8668 characters) is not visible before interaction The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is hidden until something is clicked
Counted on the page once its scripts had run, before anything was clicked.
| |||||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 67 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 67 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-browser-extension?hsLang=en 54.1% Likely 10 out of 58
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT09 | fail | 2 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 2 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Threat Scout: The free Browser Extension for instant threat intelligence H2 Automatically collect relevant threat intelligence from any web content H2 How Threat Scout works H3 Web content scanner H3 Intel extraction H3 Analyst oversight H3 CSV export H2 Exclusive features for EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Platform users H3 Intel creation in TIP H3 Automated lookups H2 How you can use Threat Scout H3 Streamline threat research H5 How Threat Scout makes a difference level jumped H3 Augment your SOC H5 How Threat Scout makes a difference level jumped H2 How Threat Scout helps your team H2 Stronger security H2 Streamlined efficiency H2 Smarter decision-making H2 Learn more about Threat Scout H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</title> <meta name="description" content="Enhance cyber threat intelligence gathering with the Threat Scout browser extension. Extract and export actionable data faster. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</title> <meta name="description" content="Enhance cyber threat intelligence gathering with the Threat Scout browser extension. Extract and export actionable data faster. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</title> <meta name="description" content="Enhance cyber threat intelligence gathering with the Threat Scout browser extension. Extract and export actionable data faster. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 2 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 2 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Threat Scout: The free Browser Extension for instant threat intelligence H2 Automatically collect relevant threat intelligence from any web content H2 How Threat Scout works H3 Web content scanner H3 Intel extraction H3 Analyst oversight H3 CSV export H2 Exclusive features for EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Platform users H3 Intel creation in TIP H3 Automated lookups H2 How you can use Threat Scout H3 Streamline threat research H5 How Threat Scout makes a difference level jumped H3 Augment your SOC H5 How Threat Scout makes a difference level jumped H2 How Threat Scout helps your team H2 Stronger security H2 Streamlined efficiency H2 Smarter decision-making H2 Learn more about Threat Scout H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||
| MS02 | warning | 6 of 48 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for | |||||||||
What we check Whether the page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. What good looks like The page's buttons, links and form controls each carry a name once the page has loaded. Why it matters Unnamed controls are identified by their position on the screen alone, so a redesign moves what they refer to. What we found on this page 6 of 48 buttons, links and controls on the loaded page carry no name in the page's code saying what each is for The evidence, taken from the page as served The controls on this page that carry no name
Read on the page once its scripts had run.
| |||||||||||
| MS04 | warning | the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent | |||||||||
What we check Accessibility markup faults: invented roles, labels pointing at nothing, live controls marked hidden. What good looks like The page's accessibility markup is sound, with valid roles and no labels pointing at nothing. Why it matters The page's own description of its controls is wrong, so what it offers and what it declares do not match. What we found on this page the page's naming markup is faulty: 3 name label(s) point at nothing: the code that should hold the name is absent The evidence, taken from the page as served The faulty markup, as the page serves it once loaded
<div x-show="subnav" @keydown.escape.prevent.stop="subnav = false" role="dialog" aria-modal="true" x-id="['use cases ']" :aria-labelledby="$id('use cases ')" class="absolute top-0 pt-12 -left-8" aria-labelledby="use cases -1" style="display: none;"> <div class="relative h-full w-full flex items-center justify-center teโฆ | |||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-feeds?hsLang=en 54.6% Likely 7 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Feeds</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your security team with real-time threat intelligence feeds from EclecticIQ. Stay ahead of evolving threats with curated insights for proactive security."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeloaโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Feeds</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your security team with real-time threat intelligence feeds from EclecticIQ. Stay ahead of evolving threats with curated insights for proactive security."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeloaโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Feeds</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your security team with real-time threat intelligence feeds from EclecticIQ. Stay ahead of evolving threats with curated insights for proactive security."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeloaโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Feeds: the smart add-on to your intelligence arse H2 Feed types H3 Open Source H3 Commercial H2 How EclecticIQ Feeds work H3 Matching the right Intelligence Feeds to your needs H2 What makes our Commercial Feeds unique? H3 Real-time updates and early detection H3 Deeper threat context H3 Predictive threat insights H3 Comprehensive data sources H2 How EclecticIQ Commercial Feeds help your team H2 Smart add-on to your intelligence H2 Enhanced visibility H2 Simplified access H2 Learn more about EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/integration-partners?hsLang=en 51.4% Likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Elevate your security with seamless integrations H4 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Integration Partners</title> <meta name="description" content="Discover our 90+ integration partners, like AlienVault, CrowdStrike, Microsoft, AWS, CISA, CISCO, Splunk, Palo Alto, and IBM Security. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];iโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Integration Partners</title> <meta name="description" content="Discover our 90+ integration partners, like AlienVault, CrowdStrike, Microsoft, AWS, CISA, CISCO, Splunk, Palo Alto, and IBM Security. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];iโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 1 of 1 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters Unnamed fields leave the tie between a question and its box resting on layout, which shifts as the page reflows. What we found on this page 1 of 1 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input class="!border-black/10 shadow-inner" type="search" placeholder="Search partners" x-model="search" @keydown="$scroll('#overview', { offset: 32 })"/>Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS06 | warning | 2 of 20 images lack an alt attribute (0 inside links = unnamed controls); alt="" on decorative images is correct and not penalised | |||||||
What we check Images published with no alt text at all, and whether any of those images are themselves links. What good looks like Each informative image carries alt text describing it. Why it matters The image says nothing in text, and where it is a link that link is left with no name of its own. What we found on this page 2 of 20 images lack an alt attribute (0 inside links = unnamed controls); alt="" on decorative images is correct and not penalised The evidence, taken from the page as served The images with no alt attribute, as served (with the file each points at)
<img :src="partner.logo" :alt="partner.name" class="w-full h-full object-contain"/> <img :src="partner.logo" :alt="partner.name" class="w-full h-full object-contain object-left"/> | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Elevate your security with seamless integrations H4 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/channel-partners?hsLang=en 51.0% Likely 10 out of 41
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT31 | warning | the page carries no description of itself in its head | |||||||
What we check The page provides a meta description, the short summary offered alongside its title. What good looks like The page provides a meta description. Why it matters Absent, the page gives up its one documented summary field, though Google rewrites these freely anyway. What we found on this page the page carries no description of itself in its head The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a description tag. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Channel Partners</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.deโฆ | |||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Grow your business with industry-leading cybersecurity solutions H4 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Channel Partners</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.deโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Channel Partners</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.deโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| MS01 | fail | 1 of 1 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone | |||||||
What we check Each box, dropdown and text area in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What good looks like Each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. Why it matters Unnamed fields leave the tie between a question and its box resting on layout, which shifts as the page reflows. What we found on this page 1 of 1 boxes in the page's forms carry no name saying what each is for, so which answer belongs in which box rests on layout alone The evidence, taken from the page as served The form boxes that carry no name, as served
<input class="!border-black/10 shadow-inner" type="search" placeholder="Search partners" x-model="search" @keydown="$scroll('#overview', { offset: 32 })"/>Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each field in a form carries a name saying what it is for. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS06 | warning | 2 of 20 images lack an alt attribute (0 inside links = unnamed controls); alt="" on decorative images is correct and not penalised | |||||||
What we check Images published with no alt text at all, and whether any of those images are themselves links. What good looks like Each informative image carries alt text describing it. Why it matters The image says nothing in text, and where it is a link that link is left with no name of its own. What we found on this page 2 of 20 images lack an alt attribute (0 inside links = unnamed controls); alt="" on decorative images is correct and not penalised The evidence, taken from the page as served The images with no alt attribute, as served (with the file each points at)
<img :src="partner.logo" :alt="partner.name" class="w-full h-full object-contain"/> <img :src="partner.logo" :alt="partner.name" class="w-full h-full object-contain object-left"/> | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Grow your business with industry-leading cybersecurity solutions H4 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/about-us?hsLang=en 53.8% Likely 8 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 8 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 8 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>About us</title> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>About us</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ is ISO-certified. Headquartered in Amsterdam, and have offices in the UK, US and Singapore. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>About us</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ is ISO-certified. Headquartered in Amsterdam, and have offices in the UK, US and Singapore. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>About us</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ is ISO-certified. Headquartered in Amsterdam, and have offices in the UK, US and Singapore. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 About us H2 Our values H3 Be bold H3 Be collaborative H3 Be curious H3 Be accountable H2 EclecticIQ is certified to ISO standards H2 Our offices H3 Headquarters H3 US Office H3 UK Office H3 Singapore Office H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/leadership?hsLang=en 8.6% Extremely likely 12 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 41 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 41 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ leadership and advisory team. "/> | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Leadership</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ leadership and advisory team. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Leadership</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ leadership and advisory team. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| CT24 | warning | the page's own content runs to 307 characters | |||||||||||
What we check The page holds enough main text to be substantive, measured against a 400 character floor. What good looks like The page holds enough main text to be substantive. Why it matters A page of a few sentences offers almost nothing to quote, so it adds little beyond its own existence. What we found on this page the page's own content runs to 307 characters The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The page's own content is the part it marks out as its main content; where it marks out none, the whole of its text is counted.
| |||||||||||||
| CT13 | warning | main content is 17% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text sits in the main content region rather than in surrounding furniture. What good looks like Most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. Why it matters When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate. What we found on this page main content is 17% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The rest is the menus, header and foot-of-page text that appear on other pages of the site as well.
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Leadership</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ leadership and advisory team. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โlinkedinโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โlinkedinโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jamesoconnor314159/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlns="http:โฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/all/?fetchDeterministicClustersOnly=true&heroEntityKey=urn%3Ali%3Afsd_profile%3AACoAAAVuC7oBiGiXuxa9O_0NzRWYe74CyQA7PvM&keywords=steve%20armstrong&origin=RICH_QUERY_SUGGESTION&position=0&searchId=89704a81-177e-4e5a-a279-d4d3920dc6bc&sid=4D%3B&โฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/elena-kalinnikova-7155391/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlnsโฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sara-mcmunn-54283841/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-600 px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlns="โฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/maartenderks1/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-600 px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlns="http://โฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/francois-lavaste-bab913/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-600 px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlnโฆ <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/franklansink/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-600 px-10 xl:px-12 mt-6 xl:mt-12 leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">LinkedIn</span> <svg xmlns="http://wโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Meet our Leadership Team and Supervisory Board H2 Leadership Team H3 James O'Connor H3 Steve Armstrong H3 Elena Kalinnikova H2 Supervisory Board H3 Sara McMunn H3 Maarten Derks H3 Franรงois Lavaste H3 Frank Lansink H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| DS28 | fail | SEVERE: 60% of the links to sources on other sites did not open when they were checked. 3 point at a page that no longer exists. That is 3 of the 5 checked, which stand for the 11 links to other sites on this page | |||||||||||
What we check For a single page, the share of its links to OTHER sites, sampled, that lead nowhere. The site's own links are assessed separately. What good looks like The page's references to other sites open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact itself, shows the reference as plain text rather than as a link, or points to a source that answers. Why it matters The outside sources this page offers as support did not answer when they were asked for, so what the page claims is left resting on material that does not come back. In a regulated setting, where a link is carrying a figure or a required statement, that is the difference between a claim that is evidenced and one that is merely asserted. What we found on this page SEVERE: 60% of the links to sources on other sites did not open when they were checked. 3 point at a page that no longer exists. That is 3 of the 5 checked, which stand for the 11 links to other sites on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked on this page, with the status each returned
A link that did not open appears here in two forms. A DEAD link points at a page that has gone. A REFUSED link points at a page that is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser, so our request was declined. Both land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support did not come back when it was asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. A refused link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. A refusal by another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning. Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's references to other sites open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 15 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 300 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 300 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/news-awards?hsLang=en 51.0% Likely 11 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT31 | warning | the page carries no description of itself in its head | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page provides a meta description, the short summary offered alongside its title. What good looks like The page provides a meta description. Why it matters Absent, the page gives up its one documented summary field, though Google rewrites these freely anyway. What we found on this page the page carries no description of itself in its head The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a description tag. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 News & Awards H3 New Black Friday WarningโDo Not Shop On These Websites level jumped H3 'SilkSpecter' hacking operation uses sophisticated ring of 4,700 spoofed storefr H3 Watch out for fake online stores as Black Friday approaches H3 Why Black Friday Is A Hotbed For AI ScamsโAnd How To Spot Them H3 Fake Discount Sites Exploit Black Friday to Hijack Shopper Information H3 Fraud network uses 4,700 fake shopping sites to steal credit cards H3 โSilkSpecterโ Campaign Uses 4,000 Fake Domains Against Black Friday Shoppers H3 Socially Savvy Scattered Spider Traps Cloud Admins in Web H3 New Developer-as-a-Service on Hacking Forums Fuels Phishing and Cyberattacks H3 Oyster Backdoor Spreading via Trojanized Popular Software Downloads H3 'ONNX' MFA Bypass Targets Microsoft 365 Accounts H3 ONNX phishing service targets Microsoft 365 accounts at financial firms H3 Cyber espionage strikes Indiaโs defence and energy sectors H3 Massive Phishing Campaign Strikes Latin America: Venom RAT Targeting Multiple Se H3 Cyberespionage Campaign Targets Government, Energy Entities in India H3 Episode March 27, 2024 H3 Hackers Hit Indian Defense, Energy Sectors with Malware Posing as Air Force Invi H3 India's government, energy sector breached in cyber-espionage campaign H3 Chinese Hackers Attacking Semiconductor Industries Using Cobalt Strike Beacon H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Podcast Episode 43- Cody Barrow - Cybersecurity in the European Union Compared t H3 Episode September 1, 2023 H3 Key Group Ransomware Foiled by New Decryptor H3 Free Key Group ransomware decryptor helps victims recover data H3 Good news for Key Group ransomware victims: Free decryptor out now H3 PDF lures aimed at NATO countries contain a Russian clue H3 Manually patch this Zimbra bug that's under attack H3 The art of managing cyber risk H3 Private equity 'presents cyber security risk' for asset managers H3 [FIC 2023] : les gangs de ransomware sont-ils des entreprises comme les autres ? H3 Cybersecurity misconceptions H3 De toekomst van cybercrime H3 LockBit crew cooks up half-baked Mac ransomware H3 Dark Pink APT group linked to new KamiKakiBot attacks in Southeast Asia H3 KamiKakaBot Malware Used in Latest Dark Pink APT Attacks on Southeast Asian Targ H3 Logiciel malveillant KamiKakaBot utilisรฉ dans les derniรจres attaques APT rose fo H3 DeFi Hack Recovers Stolen Funds; Blacklotus Bypasses Windows Secure Boot H3 10 European defence tech startups to watch, according to investors H3 PassW0rd H3 2023 - Threat Intelligence Predictions H3 NATO Innovation and Technology Issue #8 H3 Russian hackers targeting Dutch gas terminal: report H3 'Russische hackers hebben het gemunt op Nederlandse gasinstallaties' H3 Comprendre le fonctionnement des hackers pour une meilleure cyber sรฉcuritรฉ H3 Collaboration is key to a stronger cyber resilience, says cybersecurity expert H3 The Top of the Netherlands H3 Soonicorn Club 2022: Top Tech Startups In Netherlands H3 EclecticIQ, Protection Contre la Cybercriminalitรฉ H3 Das Beste fรผr Daten? Sichere Kรคfighaltung! H3 Van Huffelens overvolle agenda: van datacenters tot nepnieuws H3 Six Innovative Cybersecurity Companies in the Netherlands H3 The Other Scary Virus H3 Delen van Dreigingsinformatie Als Interessante Business H3 Article FD: Cyber Security Organisations Call for National Government to Take Co H3 IT-beveiligers Pleiten voor Landelijke Regie in Strijd Tegen Cybercriminaliteit H3 EU Invests Millions in Cybersecurity H3 Europees Geld voor Expansie EclecticIQ H3 Investment Plan for Europe Supports Development of Next-generation Cyber Securit H3 Peeters biedt Dedonder Europees geld voor Belgische defensie aan H3 EIB-geld Moet Wereldspeler Maken van Nederlands Cyberveiligheidsbedrijf Eclectic H3 Biden: โCyber breach of great consequenceโ may lead to โreal shooting warโ H3 WeChat Suspends New User Registrations to Comply with Chinese laws H3 IBM Contributes Kestrel Threat Hunting Tool to OASIS Open Cybersecurity Alliance H3 SolarWinds Hackers Strike Again: Kremlin-backed Group Hits Microsoft Customers H3 Risky Biz Soap Box: EclecticIQ's CEO Joep Gommers on Operationalising Threat Int H3 EclecticIQ Platform Delivers Threat Intelligence, Hunting, and Response Capabili H3 EclecticIQ platform: Intelligence at the Core H3 ASM Tech spurts 5% after partnership with Netherlands-based EclecticIQ for new C H3 Fake COVID contact tracers H3 The evolution of ransomware threats in the energy sector H3 CyberKnight, EclecticIQ Augment Threat Detection, Hunting And Response H3 Z-CERT and EclecticIQ Cooperate to Bring Benefits of CTI to Dutch Healthcare Sec H3 EclecticIQ - Samen investeren in een Europees cybersecurity ecosysteem H3 EclecticIQ and PolyLogyx join forces to bring intelligence-led security products H3 EclecticIQ Joins Forces with Endpoint Solution Provider PolyLogyx H3 EclecticIQ: Building Next-Gen Intelligence-Powered Cybersecurity H3 Typosquatting & duplication of pharmaceutical domain: Possibly used for phishing H3 How diverse teams can help protect your business against cyber-attacks H3 Hacking as a Service? H3 EclecticIQโs new browser extension helps analysts capture threat indicators auto H3 EclecticIQ continues its global expansion, reaching significant milestones in 20 H3 Top Dutch startups to follow in 2020 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand threat- H3 How will the UK tech sector be affected by Brexit? H3 Data Privacy Day: Security industry highlights key issues H3 Amsterdam Startups to Watch in 2020 H3 Going for gold: Security learnings for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics H3 Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ hires Michel de Jong as Chief Operating Officer H3 How fake news could ruin Britain's next election H3 Cybersecurity giants join forces to combat cyberthreats under OASIS umbrella H3 Threat intelligence and the role of automation in improving security H3 Product Review - EclecticIQ Platform 2.4 H3 Maximizing the Use of Enterprise Cyber-Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Communication, communication, communication: the route to actionable cyber threa H3 The path to actionable cyber threat intelligence H3 Using OpSec to protect yourself at security industry events H3 Avoiding cyber disaster H3 Todayโs cyber threat landscape and mitigating appropriately H3 What's new in ransomware and how can businesses stay ahead of the threat? H3 Disinformation effort targeted at EU Parliament Elections H3 How security & intelligence can share the same language H3 Free Boxing Streams are being hidden on the most popular video sites H3 Understanding the modern ransomware landscape H3 Cyber Threats: How to manage intelligence in a multi-risk environment H3 Top 10 cybersecurity startups from Amsterdam that help you fight off hackers H3 Lessons learned from Ukraine elections H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ ink Middle East partnership H3 Psychological Warfare and Information Operations: The Real Threat to Western Dem H3 Election Hacking H3 German Politicians Personal Details Hacked H3 Russia Or The Far-Right: Who Hacked German Politics? H3 How not to get hacked in 2019 H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 5 Things We Know about the German Hack, from Porn to Mirrors H3 Why We Should Focus on โHow,โ not โWho,โ of Cyberattacks H3 Spike in Brexit-themed phishing attacks expected once withdrawal agreement is fi H3 Why is โAttributionโ Still the Focus Following Cyber Attacks? H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for infrastructures with new integrat H3 UK foils more than 10 cyber attacks per week, says GCHQ H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 Brings Improved Collaboration and Data Management Featur H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 Cyber security: Your boss doesn't care and that's not OK anymore H3 European Threat Intelligence provider EclecticIQ Increases North American invest H3 6 most talented online entrepreneurs in the Netherlands that deserve your attent H3 The Vulnerability Disclosure Process Still Broken H3 Batten down the ports: Linux networking bug SegmentSmack could remotely crash sy H3 Inzicht in digitale dreigingen H3 The digital โbank jobโ โ investigating the unprecedented rise in crypto threats H3 Tour de France 2018 live stream sites that let cycling fans watch race online fo H3 Adjusting to GDPR compliance challenges for threat intelligence analysts H3 Typical 24: Joep Gommers, EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ integrates with MITREโs ATT&CK framework H3 A Different Kind Of Heist: How Cryptocurrency Is Churning Profits For Criminals H3 The evolution of the cyber threat landscape โ whatโs next? H3 GDPRโs Impact On Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Data Breach H3 Ticketmaster security breach - the industry speaks H3 World Cup streaming: Free live feeds online can endanger football fans who try t H3 World Cup Russian hacking threat is real, security experts warn H3 Why The North Korean Cyber Threat Shouldn't be Ignored H3 Effectively Managing Mistrust for Optimal Cybersecurity H3 Working with Competitors H3 10 Dutch Startups to Watch in 2018 H3 10 amazing start-ups from Amsterdam to watch H3 The World Cup in motion: the infrastructure behind the greatest show on earth H3 Cybersecurity Managing Distrust: The Key To Cybersecurity H3 Will Threat Intelligence Go Dark Under GDPR? H3 The impact of GDPR on threat intelligence analysts H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 Identifying can be a waste of time H3 The great attribution debate: Why we should focus on HOW not WHO H3 Going for gold in the Cyber Olympics: a look at cybersecurity in Pyeongchang H3 Cyberattacks In An Evolving Landscape โ Should Businesses Be Worried? H3 ะะฒัะพะผะฐัะธะทะฐัะธั ะฟัะพัะตััะพะฒ ะบะธะฑะตััะฐะทะฒะตะดะบะธ ะฝะฐ ะพัะฝะพะฒะต ัะตัะตะฝะธะน ะบะปะฐััะฐ Threat Intelligen H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 How to protect against the evolving threat landscape H3 Fortune Term Sheet H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Amsterdam-based EclecticIQ secures โฌ14 million to further expand with its Cyber H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Ben Verwaayen steekt miljoenen in Nederlandse beveiligings-start-up H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 Cyber threat analysis training โ why a robust platform is critical H3 New infosec products of the weekโ: October 6, 2017 H3 EclecticIQ baut deutsches Team aus H3 The hottest startups in Amsterdam H3 Drei Ebenen der IT-Sicherheit H3 The UK's ยฃ1.9bn cyber-security spend โ getting the priorities right H3 Interview with Raymon van der Velde, VP Product & Co-founder EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ partners with SenseCy to bring leading Cyber Threat Intelligence tech H3 โCyberdreigingsinformatie nieuw antwoord op cyberaanvallenโ H3 Minister-president Rutte brengt bezoekt aan The Hague Security Delta H3 Plug Pulled on Soltra Edge Threat Info Sharing Platform H3 NZITF deploys EclecticIQ to share cyber threat information H3 WIRED Security 2016: Startup Stage H3 Daar komen de whizzkids H3 TechRound Cybersecurity40 2025 H3 Top 250 Scaleups 2022 H3 EclecticIQ Is Certified to ISO Standards H3 Top 250 Fastest Growing Companies H3 Infosec Awards H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Cyber Defense Magazine 2019 Infosec Award H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Next Unicorn Award 2018 H3 Cyber Defense 2018 Global Awards Winner H3 MKB Innovatie Top 100 van 2018 H3 SC 2018 Awards Europe H3 Top250 Scale-ups 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2017 H3 SC Magazine Lab Approved 2017 H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread full articleโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread full articleโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/11/20/new-chrome-safari-firefox-edge-warning-do-not-shop-on-these-websites/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" reโฆ <a href="https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/silkspecter-scam-ring-spoofs-big-brands-this-black-friday/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="smโฆ <a href="https://www.pcworld.com/article/2522574/watch-out-for-fake-online-stores-as-black-friday-approaches.html" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <sโฆ <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/lindseychoo/2024/11/20/black-friday-ai-scams-how-to-spot-them/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="smโฆ <a href="https://thehackernews.com/2024/11/fake-discount-sites-exploit-black.html" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncateโฆ <a href="https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/fraud-network-uses-4-700-fake-shopping-sites-to-steal-credit-cards/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofโฆ <a href="https://cyberinsider.com/silkspecter-campaign-uses-4000-fake-domains-against-black-friday-shoppers/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span cโฆ <a href="https://www.darkreading.com/cloud-security/socially-savvy-scattered-spider-traps-cloud-admins-in-web" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span โฆ <a href="https://cyberpress.org/new-developer-as-a-service-on-hacking-forums/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Reโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 News & Awards H3 New Black Friday WarningโDo Not Shop On These Websites level jumped H3 'SilkSpecter' hacking operation uses sophisticated ring of 4,700 spoofed storefr H3 Watch out for fake online stores as Black Friday approaches H3 Why Black Friday Is A Hotbed For AI ScamsโAnd How To Spot Them H3 Fake Discount Sites Exploit Black Friday to Hijack Shopper Information H3 Fraud network uses 4,700 fake shopping sites to steal credit cards H3 โSilkSpecterโ Campaign Uses 4,000 Fake Domains Against Black Friday Shoppers H3 Socially Savvy Scattered Spider Traps Cloud Admins in Web H3 New Developer-as-a-Service on Hacking Forums Fuels Phishing and Cyberattacks H3 Oyster Backdoor Spreading via Trojanized Popular Software Downloads H3 'ONNX' MFA Bypass Targets Microsoft 365 Accounts H3 ONNX phishing service targets Microsoft 365 accounts at financial firms H3 Cyber espionage strikes Indiaโs defence and energy sectors H3 Massive Phishing Campaign Strikes Latin America: Venom RAT Targeting Multiple Se H3 Cyberespionage Campaign Targets Government, Energy Entities in India H3 Episode March 27, 2024 H3 Hackers Hit Indian Defense, Energy Sectors with Malware Posing as Air Force Invi H3 India's government, energy sector breached in cyber-espionage campaign H3 Chinese Hackers Attacking Semiconductor Industries Using Cobalt Strike Beacon H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Podcast Episode 43- Cody Barrow - Cybersecurity in the European Union Compared t H3 Episode September 1, 2023 H3 Key Group Ransomware Foiled by New Decryptor H3 Free Key Group ransomware decryptor helps victims recover data H3 Good news for Key Group ransomware victims: Free decryptor out now H3 PDF lures aimed at NATO countries contain a Russian clue H3 Manually patch this Zimbra bug that's under attack H3 The art of managing cyber risk H3 Private equity 'presents cyber security risk' for asset managers H3 [FIC 2023] : les gangs de ransomware sont-ils des entreprises comme les autres ? H3 Cybersecurity misconceptions H3 De toekomst van cybercrime H3 LockBit crew cooks up half-baked Mac ransomware H3 Dark Pink APT group linked to new KamiKakiBot attacks in Southeast Asia H3 KamiKakaBot Malware Used in Latest Dark Pink APT Attacks on Southeast Asian Targ H3 Logiciel malveillant KamiKakaBot utilisรฉ dans les derniรจres attaques APT rose fo H3 DeFi Hack Recovers Stolen Funds; Blacklotus Bypasses Windows Secure Boot H3 10 European defence tech startups to watch, according to investors H3 PassW0rd H3 2023 - Threat Intelligence Predictions H3 NATO Innovation and Technology Issue #8 H3 Russian hackers targeting Dutch gas terminal: report H3 'Russische hackers hebben het gemunt op Nederlandse gasinstallaties' H3 Comprendre le fonctionnement des hackers pour une meilleure cyber sรฉcuritรฉ H3 Collaboration is key to a stronger cyber resilience, says cybersecurity expert H3 The Top of the Netherlands H3 Soonicorn Club 2022: Top Tech Startups In Netherlands H3 EclecticIQ, Protection Contre la Cybercriminalitรฉ H3 Das Beste fรผr Daten? Sichere Kรคfighaltung! H3 Van Huffelens overvolle agenda: van datacenters tot nepnieuws H3 Six Innovative Cybersecurity Companies in the Netherlands H3 The Other Scary Virus H3 Delen van Dreigingsinformatie Als Interessante Business H3 Article FD: Cyber Security Organisations Call for National Government to Take Co H3 IT-beveiligers Pleiten voor Landelijke Regie in Strijd Tegen Cybercriminaliteit H3 EU Invests Millions in Cybersecurity H3 Europees Geld voor Expansie EclecticIQ H3 Investment Plan for Europe Supports Development of Next-generation Cyber Securit H3 Peeters biedt Dedonder Europees geld voor Belgische defensie aan H3 EIB-geld Moet Wereldspeler Maken van Nederlands Cyberveiligheidsbedrijf Eclectic H3 Biden: โCyber breach of great consequenceโ may lead to โreal shooting warโ H3 WeChat Suspends New User Registrations to Comply with Chinese laws H3 IBM Contributes Kestrel Threat Hunting Tool to OASIS Open Cybersecurity Alliance H3 SolarWinds Hackers Strike Again: Kremlin-backed Group Hits Microsoft Customers H3 Risky Biz Soap Box: EclecticIQ's CEO Joep Gommers on Operationalising Threat Int H3 EclecticIQ Platform Delivers Threat Intelligence, Hunting, and Response Capabili H3 EclecticIQ platform: Intelligence at the Core H3 ASM Tech spurts 5% after partnership with Netherlands-based EclecticIQ for new C H3 Fake COVID contact tracers H3 The evolution of ransomware threats in the energy sector H3 CyberKnight, EclecticIQ Augment Threat Detection, Hunting And Response H3 Z-CERT and EclecticIQ Cooperate to Bring Benefits of CTI to Dutch Healthcare Sec H3 EclecticIQ - Samen investeren in een Europees cybersecurity ecosysteem H3 EclecticIQ and PolyLogyx join forces to bring intelligence-led security products H3 EclecticIQ Joins Forces with Endpoint Solution Provider PolyLogyx H3 EclecticIQ: Building Next-Gen Intelligence-Powered Cybersecurity H3 Typosquatting & duplication of pharmaceutical domain: Possibly used for phishing H3 How diverse teams can help protect your business against cyber-attacks H3 Hacking as a Service? H3 EclecticIQโs new browser extension helps analysts capture threat indicators auto H3 EclecticIQ continues its global expansion, reaching significant milestones in 20 H3 Top Dutch startups to follow in 2020 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand threat- H3 How will the UK tech sector be affected by Brexit? H3 Data Privacy Day: Security industry highlights key issues H3 Amsterdam Startups to Watch in 2020 H3 Going for gold: Security learnings for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics H3 Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ hires Michel de Jong as Chief Operating Officer H3 How fake news could ruin Britain's next election H3 Cybersecurity giants join forces to combat cyberthreats under OASIS umbrella H3 Threat intelligence and the role of automation in improving security H3 Product Review - EclecticIQ Platform 2.4 H3 Maximizing the Use of Enterprise Cyber-Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Communication, communication, communication: the route to actionable cyber threa H3 The path to actionable cyber threat intelligence H3 Using OpSec to protect yourself at security industry events H3 Avoiding cyber disaster H3 Todayโs cyber threat landscape and mitigating appropriately H3 What's new in ransomware and how can businesses stay ahead of the threat? H3 Disinformation effort targeted at EU Parliament Elections H3 How security & intelligence can share the same language H3 Free Boxing Streams are being hidden on the most popular video sites H3 Understanding the modern ransomware landscape H3 Cyber Threats: How to manage intelligence in a multi-risk environment H3 Top 10 cybersecurity startups from Amsterdam that help you fight off hackers H3 Lessons learned from Ukraine elections H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ ink Middle East partnership H3 Psychological Warfare and Information Operations: The Real Threat to Western Dem H3 Election Hacking H3 German Politicians Personal Details Hacked H3 Russia Or The Far-Right: Who Hacked German Politics? H3 How not to get hacked in 2019 H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 5 Things We Know about the German Hack, from Porn to Mirrors H3 Why We Should Focus on โHow,โ not โWho,โ of Cyberattacks H3 Spike in Brexit-themed phishing attacks expected once withdrawal agreement is fi H3 Why is โAttributionโ Still the Focus Following Cyber Attacks? H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for infrastructures with new integrat H3 UK foils more than 10 cyber attacks per week, says GCHQ H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 Brings Improved Collaboration and Data Management Featur H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 Cyber security: Your boss doesn't care and that's not OK anymore H3 European Threat Intelligence provider EclecticIQ Increases North American invest H3 6 most talented online entrepreneurs in the Netherlands that deserve your attent H3 The Vulnerability Disclosure Process Still Broken H3 Batten down the ports: Linux networking bug SegmentSmack could remotely crash sy H3 Inzicht in digitale dreigingen H3 The digital โbank jobโ โ investigating the unprecedented rise in crypto threats H3 Tour de France 2018 live stream sites that let cycling fans watch race online fo H3 Adjusting to GDPR compliance challenges for threat intelligence analysts H3 Typical 24: Joep Gommers, EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ integrates with MITREโs ATT&CK framework H3 A Different Kind Of Heist: How Cryptocurrency Is Churning Profits For Criminals H3 The evolution of the cyber threat landscape โ whatโs next? H3 GDPRโs Impact On Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Data Breach H3 Ticketmaster security breach - the industry speaks H3 World Cup streaming: Free live feeds online can endanger football fans who try t H3 World Cup Russian hacking threat is real, security experts warn H3 Why The North Korean Cyber Threat Shouldn't be Ignored H3 Effectively Managing Mistrust for Optimal Cybersecurity H3 Working with Competitors H3 10 Dutch Startups to Watch in 2018 H3 10 amazing start-ups from Amsterdam to watch H3 The World Cup in motion: the infrastructure behind the greatest show on earth H3 Cybersecurity Managing Distrust: The Key To Cybersecurity H3 Will Threat Intelligence Go Dark Under GDPR? H3 The impact of GDPR on threat intelligence analysts H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 Identifying can be a waste of time H3 The great attribution debate: Why we should focus on HOW not WHO H3 Going for gold in the Cyber Olympics: a look at cybersecurity in Pyeongchang H3 Cyberattacks In An Evolving Landscape โ Should Businesses Be Worried? H3 ะะฒัะพะผะฐัะธะทะฐัะธั ะฟัะพัะตััะพะฒ ะบะธะฑะตััะฐะทะฒะตะดะบะธ ะฝะฐ ะพัะฝะพะฒะต ัะตัะตะฝะธะน ะบะปะฐััะฐ Threat Intelligen H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 How to protect against the evolving threat landscape H3 Fortune Term Sheet H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Amsterdam-based EclecticIQ secures โฌ14 million to further expand with its Cyber H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Ben Verwaayen steekt miljoenen in Nederlandse beveiligings-start-up H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 Cyber threat analysis training โ why a robust platform is critical H3 New infosec products of the weekโ: October 6, 2017 H3 EclecticIQ baut deutsches Team aus H3 The hottest startups in Amsterdam H3 Drei Ebenen der IT-Sicherheit H3 The UK's ยฃ1.9bn cyber-security spend โ getting the priorities right H3 Interview with Raymon van der Velde, VP Product & Co-founder EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ partners with SenseCy to bring leading Cyber Threat Intelligence tech H3 โCyberdreigingsinformatie nieuw antwoord op cyberaanvallenโ H3 Minister-president Rutte brengt bezoekt aan The Hague Security Delta H3 Plug Pulled on Soltra Edge Threat Info Sharing Platform H3 NZITF deploys EclecticIQ to share cyber threat information H3 WIRED Security 2016: Startup Stage H3 Daar komen de whizzkids H3 TechRound Cybersecurity40 2025 H3 Top 250 Scaleups 2022 H3 EclecticIQ Is Certified to ISO Standards H3 Top 250 Fastest Growing Companies H3 Infosec Awards H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Cyber Defense Magazine 2019 Infosec Award H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Next Unicorn Award 2018 H3 Cyber Defense 2018 Global Awards Winner H3 MKB Innovatie Top 100 van 2018 H3 SC 2018 Awards Europe H3 Top250 Scale-ups 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2017 H3 SC Magazine Lab Approved 2017 H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="https://techround.co.uk/cybersecurity/7-eclecticiq/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ <a href="https://ece.nl/top250scaleups2022/?utm_campaign=GLOB%20-%20Campaign%20-%20Corporate&utm_content=210811680&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin&hss_channel=lcp-10226527" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide foโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/eclecticiq-is-certified-to-iso-standards?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none โฆ <a href="https://cyberdefenseawards.com/infosec-awards-for-2020-winners/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Readโฆ <a href="https://cybersecurity-excellence-awards.com/candidates/eclecticiq-platform-3/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none โฆ <a href="https://cyberdefenseawards.com" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span> <svg xmlns="http://wโฆ <a href="https://cybersecurity-excellence-awards.com/2019-cybersecurity-product-awards-winners-and-finalists/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <spโฆ <a href="https://www.amsterdambusinessawards.nl/_cms/awards/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ <a href="https://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span> <svg xmlns="hโฆ <a href="https://www.kvkinnovatietop100.nl/site/top-100-2018" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DS28 | fail | one link to sources on other sites was refused when it was checked. The page is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser. It is listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check For a single page, the share of its links to OTHER sites, sampled, that lead nowhere. The site's own links are assessed separately. What good looks like The page's references to other sites open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact itself, shows the reference as plain text rather than as a link, or points to a source that answers. Why it matters The outside sources this page offers as support did not answer when they were asked for, so what the page claims is left resting on material that does not come back. In a regulated setting, where a link is carrying a figure or a required statement, that is the difference between a claim that is evidenced and one that is merely asserted. What we found on this page one link to sources on other sites was refused when it was checked. The page is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser. It is listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked on this page, with the status each returned
A link that did not open appears here in two forms. A DEAD link points at a page that has gone. A REFUSED link points at a page that is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser, so our request was declined. Both land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support did not come back when it was asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. A refused link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. A refusal by another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's references to other sites open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 15 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/-reporting?hsLang=en 52.3% Likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Reporting</title> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Reporting</title> <meta name="description" content="Deliver high-quality, branded intelligence reports faster. Standardize how your team writes, formats, and shares finished reports - without breaking workflows."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Reporting</title> <meta name="description" content="Deliver high-quality, branded intelligence reports faster. Standardize how your team writes, formats, and shares finished reports - without breaking workflows."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Reporting</title> <meta name="description" content="Deliver high-quality, branded intelligence reports faster. Standardize how your team writes, formats, and shares finished reports - without breaking workflows."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-white text-blue mt-8 lg:mt-12"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Smarter finished intelligence reporting H2 A better way to manage finished intelligence reporting H2 How it works H3 Write structured, professional reports H3 Standardize with reusable templates H3 Generate reports directly from intelligence data H3 Export and deliver in the right format H2 Why it matters for your team H3 Accelerated report creation H3 Consistent, branded outputs H3 Integrated with your intelligence workflows H2 Ready to transform how your team delivers finished intelligence? H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 3 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 3 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" title="YouTube video player" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/lGb_OF903Xs?si=KNUDS9sRhXGhVFCx" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder= Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path?hsLang=en 50.8% Likely 9 out of 41
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Path</title> <meta name="description" content="A CTI Capability Maturity Model for assessing the current CTI maturity of your organization and developing a path to pre-emptive CTI operations."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&โฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 The Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) Maturity Path H3 1. The Need for a CTI Maturity Model level jumped H3 2. An Innovative Model for Assessing Current and Desired CTI Maturity H3 3. Using the Maturity Model: Know What you are Measuring! H3 4. The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 5. Six Steps to Guide Your CTI Maturity Journey H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Path</title> <meta name="description" content="A CTI Capability Maturity Model for assessing the current CTI maturity of your organization and developing a path to pre-emptive CTI operations."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&โฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Path</title> <meta name="description" content="A CTI Capability Maturity Model for assessing the current CTI maturity of your organization and developing a path to pre-emptive CTI operations."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>The Cyber Threat Intelligence Maturity Path</title> <meta name="description" content="A CTI Capability Maturity Model for assessing the current CTI maturity of your organization and developing a path to pre-emptive CTI operations."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&โฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path/the-need-for-a-cti-maturity-model" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncatโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path/an-innovative-model-for-assessing-current-and-desired-cti-maturity" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path/using-the-maturity-model-know-what-you-are-measuring" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path/the-path-to-pre-emptive-cti-operations" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/the-cyber-threat-intelligence-maturity-path/6-steps-to-guide-your-cti-maturity-journey" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-nonโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 The Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) Maturity Path H3 1. The Need for a CTI Maturity Model level jumped H3 2. An Innovative Model for Assessing Current and Desired CTI Maturity H3 3. Using the Maturity Model: Know What you are Measuring! H3 4. The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 5. Six Steps to Guide Your CTI Maturity Journey H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti?hsLang=en 50.5% Likely 10 out of 41
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Take Action with CTI</title> <meta name="description" content="Get strategic and technical guidance (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK) to operationalize your threat intelligence and make it actionable. Learn how a threat intelligence platform (TIP) can help your organization become more cyber resilient."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")โฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 227 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 227 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Get strategic and technical guidance (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK) to operationalize your threat intelligence and make it actionable. Learn how a threat intelligence platform (TIP) can help your organization become more cyber resilient."/> | |||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Take action with CTI H3 1. Operationalize Your Threat Intelligence in Four Moves level jumped H3 2. Smarten Up, Open Up, Tighten Up, and Power Up to Make Threat Intelligence Act H3 3. Three Strategic Steps to a Threat-informed Defense (TiD) H3 4. How to Use MITRE ATT&CK to Map and Track Adversary TTPs H3 5. Shifting from What to How with TTPs H3 6. Three Steps to Aligning CTI, SOC, and IR for Action H3 7. Achieving Early Warning for Cyber Resilience H3 8. Three Steps to Early Warning H3 9. How to Jumpstart High-performance CTI Operations H3 10. Preventing Your TIP from Becoming a Trash Dump H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Take Action with CTI</title> <meta name="description" content="Get strategic and technical guidance (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK) to operationalize your threat intelligence and make it actionable. Learn how a threat intelligence platform (TIP) can help your organization become more cyber resilient."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")โฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Take Action with CTI</title> <meta name="description" content="Get strategic and technical guidance (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK) to operationalize your threat intelligence and make it actionable. Learn how a threat intelligence platform (TIP) can help your organization become more cyber resilient."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Take Action with CTI</title> <meta name="description" content="Get strategic and technical guidance (e.g., MITRE ATT&CK) to operationalize your threat intelligence and make it actionable. Learn how a threat intelligence platform (TIP) can help your organization become more cyber resilient."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")โฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/operationalize-your-threat-intelligence-in-four-moves" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/smarten-up-open-up-tighten-up-and-power-up-to-make-threat-intelligence-actionable" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span clโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/three-strategic-steps-to-a-threat-informed-defense-tid" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate"โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/how-to-use-mitre-attck-to-map-and-track-adversary-ttps" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate"โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/shifting-from-what-to-how-with-ttps" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read blog</span> <โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/three-steps-to-aligning-cti-soc-and-ir-for-action" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Readโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/achieving-early-warning-for-cyber-resilience" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read blogโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/three-steps-to-early-warning" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read blog</span> <svg xmlโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/take-action-with-cti/how-to-jumpstart-high-performance-cti-operations" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read โฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Take action with CTI H3 1. Operationalize Your Threat Intelligence in Four Moves level jumped H3 2. Smarten Up, Open Up, Tighten Up, and Power Up to Make Threat Intelligence Act H3 3. Three Strategic Steps to a Threat-informed Defense (TiD) H3 4. How to Use MITRE ATT&CK to Map and Track Adversary TTPs H3 5. Shifting from What to How with TTPs H3 6. Three Steps to Aligning CTI, SOC, and IR for Action H3 7. Achieving Early Warning for Cyber Resilience H3 8. Three Steps to Early Warning H3 9. How to Jumpstart High-performance CTI Operations H3 10. Preventing Your TIP from Becoming a Trash Dump H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/open-source?hsLang=en 54.3% Likely 8 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 183 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 183 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Explore EclecticIQ's commitment to the cybersecurity community with over 50 open source projects, including Cabby and OpenTAXII. Join us in advancing threat intelligence capabilities."/> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Open Source Projects</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore EclecticIQ's commitment to the cybersecurity community with over 50 open source projects, including Cabby and OpenTAXII. Join us in advancing threat intelligence capabilities."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Open Source Projects</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore EclecticIQ's commitment to the cybersecurity community with over 50 open source projects, including Cabby and OpenTAXII. Join us in advancing threat intelligence capabilities."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Open Source Projects</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore EclecticIQ's commitment to the cybersecurity community with over 50 open source projects, including Cabby and OpenTAXII. Join us in advancing threat intelligence capabilities."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Open Source Projects H2 Featured projects H3 Cabby H3 OpenTAXII H2 EclecticIQ add-ons H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/projects?hsLang=en 50.8% Likely 9 out of 41
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>European Initiatives</title> <meta name="description" content="Special projects in collaboration with the wider cybersecurity community"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e"โฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 European Initiatives H3 1. AI-led Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) for Security Operations Centers and Na level jumped H3 2. EclecticIQ partners with NATO CCDCOE to strengthen European maritime port inf H3 3. CTI-AI: Advancing Cyber Threat Intelligence with Artificial Intelligence H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>European Initiatives</title> <meta name="description" content="Special projects in collaboration with the wider cybersecurity community"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e"โฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>European Initiatives</title> <meta name="description" content="Special projects in collaboration with the wider cybersecurity community"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e"โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>European Initiatives</title> <meta name="description" content="Special projects in collaboration with the wider cybersecurity community"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e"โฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 2 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread blogโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/projects/cti-ai" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read blog</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/projects/landmark-nato-ccdcoe-policy-brief-shows-cross-sector-collaboration-delivers-actionable-intelligence-for-maritime-port-infrastructure-security" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semiโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/projects/cti-ai-advancing-cyber-threat-intelligence-with-artificial-intelligence" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trunโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 European Initiatives H3 1. AI-led Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) for Security Operations Centers and Na level jumped H3 2. EclecticIQ partners with NATO CCDCOE to strengthen European maritime port inf H3 3. CTI-AI: Advancing Cyber Threat Intelligence with Artificial Intelligence H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/defense-tip?hsLang=en 52.8% Likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 326 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 326 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Doctrine-aligned threat intelligence ready for national defense missions Built into EclecticIQ Intelligence Center, the Defense TIP aligns cyber threat intelligence with NATO and U.S. military doctrine, so teams can deliver trusted, interoperable outputs at operational tempo, withoโฆ | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Defense TIP</title> <meta name="description" content="Doctrine-aligned threat intelligence ready for national defense missions Built into EclecticIQ Intelligence Center, the Defense TIP aligns cyber threat intelligence with NATO and U.S. military doctrine, so teams can deliver trusted, interoperable outputs at operational tempo, without translating, reformatting, or retraining."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onloadโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Defense TIP</title> <meta name="description" content="Doctrine-aligned threat intelligence ready for national defense missions Built into EclecticIQ Intelligence Center, the Defense TIP aligns cyber threat intelligence with NATO and U.S. military doctrine, so teams can deliver trusted, interoperable outputs at operational tempo, without translating, reformatting, or retraining."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onloadโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Defense TIP</title> <meta name="description" content="Doctrine-aligned threat intelligence ready for national defense missions Built into EclecticIQ Intelligence Center, the Defense TIP aligns cyber threat intelligence with NATO and U.S. military doctrine, so teams can deliver trusted, interoperable outputs at operational tempo, without translating, reformatting, or retraining."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onloadโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-white text-blue mt-8 lg:mt-12"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Doctrine-aligned threat intelligence ready for national defense missions H2 Built for command and coalition use H2 How it works H3 Doctrine-aligned language H3 Classifications & credibility built in H3 Multi-discipline intelligence in one model H3 Templates for military intelligence products H2 Why it matters for your team H3 Decisions move faster H3 Analysts focus on insight H3 Coalition sharing works the first time H3 Confidence holds up the chain H2 Make cyber intelligence mission-ready H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 3 of 3 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 3 of 3 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Nvbm8sgiEd4?si=O9bZJhDwewBhH2En" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder="0"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Nvbm8sgiEd4?si=O9bZJhDwewBhH2En" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder="0"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/alert-triage?hsLang=en 52.8% Likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 249 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 249 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="See how EclecticIQ Platform helps security teams cut through the noise and focus on what really matters. Learn how to define whatโs important, surface relevant intelligence, and respond with confidence, simplifying alert triage from start to finish."/> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Alert triage</title> <meta name="description" content="See how EclecticIQ Platform helps security teams cut through the noise and focus on what really matters. Learn how to define whatโs important, surface relevant intelligence, and respond with confidence, simplifying alert triage from start to finish."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"iโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Alert triage</title> <meta name="description" content="See how EclecticIQ Platform helps security teams cut through the noise and focus on what really matters. Learn how to define whatโs important, surface relevant intelligence, and respond with confidence, simplifying alert triage from start to finish."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"iโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Alert triage</title> <meta name="description" content="See how EclecticIQ Platform helps security teams cut through the noise and focus on what really matters. Learn how to define whatโs important, surface relevant intelligence, and respond with confidence, simplifying alert triage from start to finish."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"iโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-white text-blue mt-8 lg:mt-12"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Simplified alert triage in three easy steps H2 A better way to handle alerts H2 How it works H3 1. Define what matters H3 2. Surface relevant intelligence H3 3. Take action H2 Why it matters for your team H3 Cut through the noise H3 See the whole context H3 Stay aligned, move faster H2 Ready to simplify alert triage? H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 3 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 3 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" title="YouTube video player" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Vz74BDcOFhM?si=ycavm973XzsAmLwr" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder= Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/incident-response?hsLang=en 53.1% Likely 8 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Incident response</title> <meta name="description" content="Respond to incidents faster with one integrated workflow for triage, investigation, enrichment, and AI-powered reporting. No silos, no switching tools."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Incident response</title> <meta name="description" content="Respond to incidents faster with one integrated workflow for triage, investigation, enrichment, and AI-powered reporting. No silos, no switching tools."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Incident response</title> <meta name="description" content="Respond to incidents faster with one integrated workflow for triage, investigation, enrichment, and AI-powered reporting. No silos, no switching tools."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return โฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-white text-blue mt-8 lg:mt-12"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Be in control when incidents hit H2 A better way to manage incident response H2 How it works H3 Visualize and triage H3 Investigate and enrich H3 Build and refine reports H3 Share and act H2 Why it matters for your team H3 Accelerated response with guided triage H3 Smarter investigations with visual context H3 Effortless, structured reporting with AI H2 Ready to transform your incident response? H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 3 of 3 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 3 of 3 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/zgtbzqOyQKA?si=MexVLIshXtReQG_v" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder="0"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" xml="lang" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/zgtbzqOyQKA?si=MexVLIshXtReQG_v" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameborder="0"/> Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/ai-search?hsLang=en 52.3% Likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>AI Search</title> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>AI Search</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ makes threat intelligence search faster and easier with AI-powered natural language queries. No syntax needed, full Lucene control when required."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(tโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>AI Search</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ makes threat intelligence search faster and easier with AI-powered natural language queries. No syntax needed, full Lucene control when required."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(tโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>AI Search</title> <meta name="description" content="EclecticIQ makes threat intelligence search faster and easier with AI-powered natural language queries. No syntax needed, full Lucene control when required."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(tโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide h-11 xl:h-12 px-6 xl:px-7 rounded-full transition-all duration-200 bg-white text-blue mt-8 lg:mt-12"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 From question to answers in seconds H2 A better way to search threat intelligence H2 How it works H3 Ask your question naturally H3 AI builds a structured query H3 Get back focused, relevant results H2 Why it matters for your team H3 Search without syntax training H3 Accelerate investigations and triage H3 More consistent, more reliable results H2 Ready to find intel the easy way? H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 3 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 3 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
| MS14 | fail | 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form | |||||||
What we check Whether each video carries captions of its own, timed text on the video itself, judged together with whether the page holds a written transcript. What good looks like Captions carried on the video. A WARNING means the video has no captions but a written transcript on the page holds the words. A FAIL means neither exists, so nothing spoken is available as text in any form; that total absence is marked here once, not spread across two findings. Why it matters Spoken content that exists only as sound is invisible to a reader, human or machine: nothing said in the video can be found, read or quoted. What we found on this page 1 video(s) on the page with no captions on the video and no written transcript on the page: nothing spoken is available as text in any form The evidence, taken from the page as served Each video on the page, as served: its code, source file and caption track
No caption track on the video and no transcript link on the page. <iframe class="hs-responsive-embed-iframe" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border: none;" title="YouTube video player" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" xml="lang" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jPa0nrvRI9I?si=WwqRsNx5gboDg8vw" width="1310" height="737" data-service="youtube" frameb Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: captions carried on the video. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/stix-taxii?hsLang=en 51.1% Likely 11 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 202 | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 202 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Explore the industry standards for Cyber Threat Intelligence with STIX and TAXII. Learn how these tools enable real-time threat information exchange and collaboration within the cybersecurity community."/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 What is STIX and TAXII? H4 STIX level jumped H4 TAXII H2 Why is it important? H2 The ecosystem H2 Get started H3 1. Read About STIX and TAXII H3 2. Set-up your TAXII server and/or client H3 3. Transform your Intelligence / Indicators H3 4. Lift off! H2 STIX and TAXII in action H2 Resources H3 STIX 2.1 H3 Awesome libraries H3 TAXII collection H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>What is STIX and TAXII?</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore the industry standards for Cyber Threat Intelligence with STIX and TAXII. Learn how these tools enable real-time threat information exchange and collaboration within the cybersecurity community."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===nโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>What is STIX and TAXII?</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore the industry standards for Cyber Threat Intelligence with STIX and TAXII. Learn how these tools enable real-time threat information exchange and collaboration within the cybersecurity community."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===nโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>What is STIX and TAXII?</title> <meta name="description" content="Explore the industry standards for Cyber Threat Intelligence with STIX and TAXII. Learn how these tools enable real-time threat information exchange and collaboration within the cybersecurity community."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===nโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 What is STIX and TAXII? H4 STIX level jumped H4 TAXII H2 Why is it important? H2 The ecosystem H2 Get started H3 1. Read About STIX and TAXII H3 2. Set-up your TAXII server and/or client H3 3. Transform your Intelligence / Indicators H3 4. Lift off! H2 STIX and TAXII in action H2 Resources H3 STIX 2.1 H3 Awesome libraries H3 TAXII collection H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โhereโ | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โhereโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="https://test.taxiistand.com/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">here</a> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DS28 | fail | one link to sources on other sites points at a page that no longer exists. It is listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check For a single page, the share of its links to OTHER sites, sampled, that lead nowhere. The site's own links are assessed separately. What good looks like The page's references to other sites open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact itself, shows the reference as plain text rather than as a link, or points to a source that answers. Why it matters The outside sources this page offers as support did not answer when they were asked for, so what the page claims is left resting on material that does not come back. In a regulated setting, where a link is carrying a figure or a required statement, that is the difference between a claim that is evidenced and one that is merely asserted. What we found on this page one link to sources on other sites points at a page that no longer exists. It is listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked on this page, with the status each returned
A link that did not open appears here in two forms. A DEAD link points at a page that has gone. A REFUSED link points at a page that is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser, so our request was declined. Both land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support did not come back when it was asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. A refused link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. A refusal by another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's references to other sites open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 15 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en 32.1% Very likely 9 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT31 | warning | the page carries no description of itself in its head | |||||||||||
What we check The page provides a meta description, the short summary offered alongside its title. What good looks like The page provides a meta description. Why it matters Absent, the page gives up its one documented summary field, though Google rewrites these freely anyway. What we found on this page the page carries no description of itself in its head The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a description tag. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Book a demo</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaultโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 See our Threat Intelligence Platform in action H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Book a demo</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaultโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Book a demo</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaultโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Book a demo</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.defaultโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 See our Threat Intelligence Platform in action H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 329 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 82% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 329 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 82% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library?hsLang=en 49.5% Likely 11 out of 41
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS17 | fail | the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited | |||||||
What we check Each page names one preferred address for itself, its canonical link. What good looks like Each page names one preferred address for itself. Why it matters With no preferred address stated, duplicate copies compete and the version that ends up cited is arbitrary. What we found on this page the page states no preferred address for itself, so duplicate copies compete to be the one cited The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag naming the page's preferred address. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆWhy it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: each page names one preferred address for itself. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Resources</title> | |||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 16 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 16 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> | |||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A level jumped H3 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H3 Censys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Bluesky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 The information age battlefield: Combining CTI & Information Operations Intellig H3 Modat Integration with EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Twitter (X) and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Telegram and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ReversingLabs Spectra Analyze and Spectra Intelligence Integration with Eclectic H3 VMRay UniqueSignal and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Bitdefender Sandbox and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 The Weaponization of AI & Implications for Defenders H3 An AI-driven threat intelligence program H3 AI-Powered CTI Excellence: Transforming European Cybersecurity Operations H3 A Stakeholder-centric Approach to Building a High-performing CTI Practice H3 Beyond the IOC: Elevating Threat Intelligence with Tactics, Techniques, and Proc H3 STIX 2.1 and Beyond: The Essential Role of STIX in CTI Operations H3 Strategic Intelligence: Translating APAC Threats to Business Risk H3 The Context Advantage: from Drowning in Data to Decisive Defense H3 Strengthening Europeโs cybersecurity future: A strategic imperative H3 SilkSpecter exposed: Inside a global phishing operation H3 Sandwormโs Cyber Espionage: Russiaโs GRU-Linked APT Uses Pirated Software in Ukr H3 Needle-Sharp CTI: AI for Business-Aligned Threats H3 Qualys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Silobreaker and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Microsoft Sentinel and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Intel 471 and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Kaspersky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Enhancing Triage and Collaboration for Global Banking Security H3 Recorded Future and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Flashpoint and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 Accelerate Incident Response with Threat Intelligence H3 Augment Your SOC with Human-Led Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Empowers a National CERTโs Collaborative Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Splunk and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 IBM Security and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Google Chronicle and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Cortex XSOAR and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Threat Intelligence Platform H3 EclecticIQ Intelligence Platform Makes Threat Intelligence Actionable for Financ H3 CTI Maturity-driven Threat Intelligence Platform Buyerโs Guide H3 Building a Strong CTI Foundation H3 Threat Intelligence Browser Extension H3 ServiceNow and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2026 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Resources</title> <meta name="description" content="Resource Library"/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);rโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 6 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โthreat intelligence browser extensionโ and 3 more; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 6 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โdownloadโ, โthreat intelligence browser extensionโ and 3 more; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-platform" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/platform.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Platform</span> </a> <a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-browser-extension" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/browser.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Browser Extension</span> </a> <a class="flex items-center gap-6 hover:text-red" href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-feeds" target="_self"> <img class="w-8" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/svg/feeds.svg" alt=""/> <span>Threat Intelligence Feeds</span> </a> <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/intelligent-mapping-of-cti-to-mitre-attck-automating-ttp-classification-with-ai" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-noโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/advanced-static-analysis-real-time-threat-intelligence-for-faster-triage" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none trunโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/censys-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlnโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/bluesky-and-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/the-information-age-battlefield" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</span> <svg xmlns="http://โฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/modat-integration-with-eclecticiq-intelligence-center" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Download</spaโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Resource Library H3 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A level jumped H3 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H3 Censys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Bluesky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 The information age battlefield: Combining CTI & Information Operations Intellig H3 Modat Integration with EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Twitter (X) and EclecticIQ Intelligence Centerโข H3 Telegram and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 ReversingLabs Spectra Analyze and Spectra Intelligence Integration with Eclectic H3 VMRay UniqueSignal and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Bitdefender Sandbox and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 The Weaponization of AI & Implications for Defenders H3 An AI-driven threat intelligence program H3 AI-Powered CTI Excellence: Transforming European Cybersecurity Operations H3 A Stakeholder-centric Approach to Building a High-performing CTI Practice H3 Beyond the IOC: Elevating Threat Intelligence with Tactics, Techniques, and Proc H3 STIX 2.1 and Beyond: The Essential Role of STIX in CTI Operations H3 Strategic Intelligence: Translating APAC Threats to Business Risk H3 The Context Advantage: from Drowning in Data to Decisive Defense H3 Strengthening Europeโs cybersecurity future: A strategic imperative H3 SilkSpecter exposed: Inside a global phishing operation H3 Sandwormโs Cyber Espionage: Russiaโs GRU-Linked APT Uses Pirated Software in Ukr H3 Needle-Sharp CTI: AI for Business-Aligned Threats H3 Qualys and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Silobreaker and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Microsoft Sentinel and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Group-IB and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Intel 471 and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Kaspersky and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Enhancing Triage and Collaboration for Global Banking Security H3 Recorded Future and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Flashpoint and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 The Path to Pre-emptive CTI Operations H3 Accelerate Incident Response with Threat Intelligence H3 Augment Your SOC with Human-Led Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ Empowers a National CERTโs Collaborative Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Splunk and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 IBM Security and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Google Chronicle and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Cortex XSOAR and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Threat Intelligence Platform H3 EclecticIQ Intelligence Platform Makes Threat Intelligence Actionable for Financ H3 CTI Maturity-driven Threat Intelligence Platform Buyerโs Guide H3 Building a Strong CTI Foundation H3 Threat Intelligence Browser Extension H3 ServiceNow and EclecticIQ Intelligence Center H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/contact?hsLang=en 29.9% Very likely 13 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 7 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 7 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Contact</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 44 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 44 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Contact EclecticIQ for non-sales inquiries. "/> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Get in touch H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Contact</title> <meta name="description" content="Contact EclecticIQ for non-sales inquiries. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Contact</title> <meta name="description" content="Contact EclecticIQ for non-sales inquiries. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| CT24 | warning | the page's own content runs to 376 characters | |||||||||||
What we check The page holds enough main text to be substantive, measured against a 400 character floor. What good looks like The page holds enough main text to be substantive. Why it matters A page of a few sentences offers almost nothing to quote, so it adds little beyond its own existence. What we found on this page the page's own content runs to 376 characters The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The page's own content is the part it marks out as its main content; where it marks out none, the whole of its text is counted.
| |||||||||||||
| CT13 | warning | main content is 20% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text sits in the main content region rather than in surrounding furniture. What good looks like Most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. Why it matters When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate. What we found on this page main content is 20% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The rest is the menus, header and foot-of-page text that appear on other pages of the site as well.
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Contact</title> <meta name="description" content="Contact EclecticIQ for non-sales inquiries. "/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1โฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Get in touch H3 (no text) level jumped H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 312 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 85% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 312 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 85% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/cookie-notice?hsLang=en 54.6% Likely 7 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>EclecticIQ Cookie Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="What types of cookies do we use? EclecticIQ uses different types of cookies. A list of types of cookies used by EclecticIQ can be found here."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>EclecticIQ Cookie Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="What types of cookies do we use? EclecticIQ uses different types of cookies. A list of types of cookies used by EclecticIQ can be found here."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>EclecticIQ Cookie Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="What types of cookies do we use? EclecticIQ uses different types of cookies. A list of types of cookies used by EclecticIQ can be found here."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=eโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Cookie Notice H2 What types of cookies do we use? H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/impressum?hsLang=en 29.5% Very likely 13 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 9 chars | |||||||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 9 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Impressum</title> | |||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Impressum H4 EclecticIQ B.V. level jumped H4 Registered address H4 Contact information H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Impressum</title> <meta name="description" content="Our Impressum show a statement of ownership, registered business address, business registration information, and VAT ID."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"inโฆ | |||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Impressum</title> <meta name="description" content="Our Impressum show a statement of ownership, registered business address, business registration information, and VAT ID."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"inโฆ | |||||||||||||
| AR13 | warning | only 255 characters of this page read as its own content, so either the page is thin or its own words cannot be told apart from the parts repeated across the site | |||||||||||
What we check Whether the page's main content is marked off from the navigation and footer around it. What good looks like A main or article region marks the primary content off from the navigation and footer around it. Why it matters Pulling the page's text returns menus and legal footers mixed with the substance, so the answer arrives buried in noise. What we found on this page only 255 characters of this page read as its own content, so either the page is thin or its own words cannot be told apart from the parts repeated across the site The evidence, taken from the page as served The main text extracted from the page, as served
Impressum EclecticIQ B.V. Dutch Chamber of Commerce registration number (KvK nummer): 61333999VAT number: NL8543 010 82B01 Registered address De Boelelaan 71083 HJ AmsterdamThe Netherlands Contact information Tel: +31 20 737 1063Email: info@eclecticiq.com | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| CT24 | warning | the page's own content runs to 255 characters | |||||||||||
What we check The page holds enough main text to be substantive, measured against a 400 character floor. What good looks like The page holds enough main text to be substantive. Why it matters A page of a few sentences offers almost nothing to quote, so it adds little beyond its own existence. What we found on this page the page's own content runs to 255 characters The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The page's own content is the part it marks out as its main content; where it marks out none, the whole of its text is counted.
| |||||||||||||
| CT13 | warning | main content is 15% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text sits in the main content region rather than in surrounding furniture. What good looks like Most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. Why it matters When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate. What we found on this page main content is 15% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The rest is the menus, header and foot-of-page text that appear on other pages of the site as well.
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Impressum</title> <meta name="description" content="Our Impressum show a statement of ownership, registered business address, business registration information, and VAT ID."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"inโฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Impressum H4 EclecticIQ B.V. level jumped H4 Registered address H4 Contact information H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
| CT34 | fail | the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 292 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a page's own words are so few against a large shared navigation and footer that it reads as near-identical to other pages. What good looks like A page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. Why it matters When shared furniture is most of the text, distinct pages look like copies of each other and the little real content is easily passed over. What we found on this page the page's own words are thin: 266 of its 292 words are shared navigation and footer, so it reads as 88% identical to another page, which a machine can then take as a duplicate and pass over, missing the little content that is its own; the matching page is named in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served This page's own words, lost in shared navigation and footer
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: a page carries enough of its own words that a shared navigation and footer do not make it read as a copy of other pages. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 1 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the supporting checks, so it carries the lightest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure is a real and common route to a wrong answer for the content it affects, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/privacy?hsLang=en 54.3% Likely 8 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 184 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 184 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Get familiar with EclecticIQ's Privacy Notice. We are committed to fulfilling the requirements under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other data protection frameworks."/> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Privacy Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="Get familiar with EclecticIQ's Privacy Notice. We are committed to fulfilling the requirements under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other data protection frameworks."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=oโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Privacy Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="Get familiar with EclecticIQ's Privacy Notice. We are committed to fulfilling the requirements under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other data protection frameworks."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=oโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Privacy Notice</title> <meta name="description" content="Get familiar with EclecticIQ's Privacy Notice. We are committed to fulfilling the requirements under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other data protection frameworks."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=oโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Privacy Notice H2 How we collect your data? H2 Types of data collected H2 Legal basis for processing H2 Data retention H2 Data sharing practices H2 Data security and data transfers H2 Marketing H2 Your rights under the GDPR H2 Cookies H2 Updates to this Privacy Notice H2 Contact information H2 Personal Data of Children H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/threat-intelligence-platform-product-sheet?hsLang=en 55.4% Likely 7 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 201 | |||||||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 201 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Boost your security operations with EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Platform. Leverage AI and contextual insights to prioritize critical threats, make faster decisions, and stay ahead of emerging risks."/> | |||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||
| CT13 | warning | main content is 24% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out | |||||||||||
What we check How much of the page's text sits in the main content region rather than in surrounding furniture. What good looks like Most of the page's text sits in its main content region rather than in the surrounding furniture. Why it matters When the main region is a small slice of the page, what is pulled out is mostly menus and boilerplate. What we found on this page main content is 24% of the page's text; the shared furniture around it dominates what is read out The evidence, taken from the page as served How much of this page is its own content
Counted from the page as served, before any script runs. The rest is the menus, header and foot-of-page text that appear on other pages of the site as well.
| |||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Boost your security operations with EclecticIQ Threat Intelligence Platform. Leverage AI and contextual insights to prioritize critical threats, make faster decisions, and stay ahead of emerging risks."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0โฆ | |||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Threat Intelligence Platform H2 Download Product Sheet H3 (no text) H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/intelligent-mapping-of-cti-to-mitre-attck-automating-ttp-classification-with-ai?hsLang=en 55.4% Likely 7 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 81 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 81 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with AI</title> | |||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 338 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 338 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="This webinar explores automating CTI to MITRE ATT&CK mapping using transformer-based multi-label classification, embedding similarity methods, and LLMs, before diving into findings from the CTI-AI case study; examining how AI enhances SOC and CTI operations through faster analysis,โฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with AI</title> <meta name="description" content="This webinar explores automating CTI to MITRE ATT&CK mapping using transformer-based multi-label classification, embedding similarity methods, and LLMs, before diving into findings from the CTI-AI case study; examining how AI enhances SOC and CTI operations through faster analysis, improved threat modelling, and smarter decision-making."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElemenโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Intelligent Mapping of CTI to MITRE ATT&CK: Automating TTP Classification with A H2 View Webinar H3 (no text) H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/library/advanced-static-analysis-real-time-threat-intelligence-for-faster-triage?hsLang=en 55.4% Likely 7 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT06 | warning | title length 74 chars | |||||||
What we check The title's length sits in a usable window, between 10 and 65 characters. What good looks like The title's length sits in a usable window, neither too short to say anything nor too long to be cut. Why it matters A title outside that window is liable to be rewritten elsewhere, and control of the page's name goes with it. What we found on this page title length 74 chars The evidence, taken from the page as served The page title, as served
<title>Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage</title> | |||||||||
| CT32 | warning | length 343 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 343 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage: Validating suspicious files & improving SOC decisions in a unified workflow SOC teams are overwhelmed with suspicious files and URLs, but slow, fragmented analysis makes it difficult to determine wโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage</title> <meta name="description" content="Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage: Validating suspicious files & improving SOC decisions in a unified workflow SOC teams are overwhelmed with suspicious files and URLs, but slow, fragmented analysis makes it difficult to determine what is truly malicious, what is benign, and what requires escalation."/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElemโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-โฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Advanced Static Analysis + Real-Time Threat Intelligence for Faster Triage H2 View Webinar H3 (no text) H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/news-awards 51.0% Likely 11 out of 42
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT31 | warning | the page carries no description of itself in its head | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page provides a meta description, the short summary offered alongside its title. What good looks like The page provides a meta description. Why it matters Absent, the page gives up its one documented summary field, though Google rewrites these freely anyway. What we found on this page the page carries no description of itself in its head The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a description tag. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT09 | fail | 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Heading levels step down one at a time, rather than jumping from an H2 straight to an H5. What good looks like Heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. Why it matters A skipped level breaks the trail that says which section a passage belongs to, so it is filed under the wrong one. What we found on this page 1 skipped heading level(s) in document order The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 News & Awards H3 New Black Friday WarningโDo Not Shop On These Websites level jumped H3 'SilkSpecter' hacking operation uses sophisticated ring of 4,700 spoofed storefr H3 Watch out for fake online stores as Black Friday approaches H3 Why Black Friday Is A Hotbed For AI ScamsโAnd How To Spot Them H3 Fake Discount Sites Exploit Black Friday to Hijack Shopper Information H3 Fraud network uses 4,700 fake shopping sites to steal credit cards H3 โSilkSpecterโ Campaign Uses 4,000 Fake Domains Against Black Friday Shoppers H3 Socially Savvy Scattered Spider Traps Cloud Admins in Web H3 New Developer-as-a-Service on Hacking Forums Fuels Phishing and Cyberattacks H3 Oyster Backdoor Spreading via Trojanized Popular Software Downloads H3 'ONNX' MFA Bypass Targets Microsoft 365 Accounts H3 ONNX phishing service targets Microsoft 365 accounts at financial firms H3 Cyber espionage strikes Indiaโs defence and energy sectors H3 Massive Phishing Campaign Strikes Latin America: Venom RAT Targeting Multiple Se H3 Cyberespionage Campaign Targets Government, Energy Entities in India H3 Episode March 27, 2024 H3 Hackers Hit Indian Defense, Energy Sectors with Malware Posing as Air Force Invi H3 India's government, energy sector breached in cyber-espionage campaign H3 Chinese Hackers Attacking Semiconductor Industries Using Cobalt Strike Beacon H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Podcast Episode 43- Cody Barrow - Cybersecurity in the European Union Compared t H3 Episode September 1, 2023 H3 Key Group Ransomware Foiled by New Decryptor H3 Free Key Group ransomware decryptor helps victims recover data H3 Good news for Key Group ransomware victims: Free decryptor out now H3 PDF lures aimed at NATO countries contain a Russian clue H3 Manually patch this Zimbra bug that's under attack H3 The art of managing cyber risk H3 Private equity 'presents cyber security risk' for asset managers H3 [FIC 2023] : les gangs de ransomware sont-ils des entreprises comme les autres ? H3 Cybersecurity misconceptions H3 De toekomst van cybercrime H3 LockBit crew cooks up half-baked Mac ransomware H3 Dark Pink APT group linked to new KamiKakiBot attacks in Southeast Asia H3 KamiKakaBot Malware Used in Latest Dark Pink APT Attacks on Southeast Asian Targ H3 Logiciel malveillant KamiKakaBot utilisรฉ dans les derniรจres attaques APT rose fo H3 DeFi Hack Recovers Stolen Funds; Blacklotus Bypasses Windows Secure Boot H3 10 European defence tech startups to watch, according to investors H3 PassW0rd H3 2023 - Threat Intelligence Predictions H3 NATO Innovation and Technology Issue #8 H3 Russian hackers targeting Dutch gas terminal: report H3 'Russische hackers hebben het gemunt op Nederlandse gasinstallaties' H3 Comprendre le fonctionnement des hackers pour une meilleure cyber sรฉcuritรฉ H3 Collaboration is key to a stronger cyber resilience, says cybersecurity expert H3 The Top of the Netherlands H3 Soonicorn Club 2022: Top Tech Startups In Netherlands H3 EclecticIQ, Protection Contre la Cybercriminalitรฉ H3 Das Beste fรผr Daten? Sichere Kรคfighaltung! H3 Van Huffelens overvolle agenda: van datacenters tot nepnieuws H3 Six Innovative Cybersecurity Companies in the Netherlands H3 The Other Scary Virus H3 Delen van Dreigingsinformatie Als Interessante Business H3 Article FD: Cyber Security Organisations Call for National Government to Take Co H3 IT-beveiligers Pleiten voor Landelijke Regie in Strijd Tegen Cybercriminaliteit H3 EU Invests Millions in Cybersecurity H3 Europees Geld voor Expansie EclecticIQ H3 Investment Plan for Europe Supports Development of Next-generation Cyber Securit H3 Peeters biedt Dedonder Europees geld voor Belgische defensie aan H3 EIB-geld Moet Wereldspeler Maken van Nederlands Cyberveiligheidsbedrijf Eclectic H3 Biden: โCyber breach of great consequenceโ may lead to โreal shooting warโ H3 WeChat Suspends New User Registrations to Comply with Chinese laws H3 IBM Contributes Kestrel Threat Hunting Tool to OASIS Open Cybersecurity Alliance H3 SolarWinds Hackers Strike Again: Kremlin-backed Group Hits Microsoft Customers H3 Risky Biz Soap Box: EclecticIQ's CEO Joep Gommers on Operationalising Threat Int H3 EclecticIQ Platform Delivers Threat Intelligence, Hunting, and Response Capabili H3 EclecticIQ platform: Intelligence at the Core H3 ASM Tech spurts 5% after partnership with Netherlands-based EclecticIQ for new C H3 Fake COVID contact tracers H3 The evolution of ransomware threats in the energy sector H3 CyberKnight, EclecticIQ Augment Threat Detection, Hunting And Response H3 Z-CERT and EclecticIQ Cooperate to Bring Benefits of CTI to Dutch Healthcare Sec H3 EclecticIQ - Samen investeren in een Europees cybersecurity ecosysteem H3 EclecticIQ and PolyLogyx join forces to bring intelligence-led security products H3 EclecticIQ Joins Forces with Endpoint Solution Provider PolyLogyx H3 EclecticIQ: Building Next-Gen Intelligence-Powered Cybersecurity H3 Typosquatting & duplication of pharmaceutical domain: Possibly used for phishing H3 How diverse teams can help protect your business against cyber-attacks H3 Hacking as a Service? H3 EclecticIQโs new browser extension helps analysts capture threat indicators auto H3 EclecticIQ continues its global expansion, reaching significant milestones in 20 H3 Top Dutch startups to follow in 2020 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand threat- H3 How will the UK tech sector be affected by Brexit? H3 Data Privacy Day: Security industry highlights key issues H3 Amsterdam Startups to Watch in 2020 H3 Going for gold: Security learnings for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics H3 Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ hires Michel de Jong as Chief Operating Officer H3 How fake news could ruin Britain's next election H3 Cybersecurity giants join forces to combat cyberthreats under OASIS umbrella H3 Threat intelligence and the role of automation in improving security H3 Product Review - EclecticIQ Platform 2.4 H3 Maximizing the Use of Enterprise Cyber-Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Communication, communication, communication: the route to actionable cyber threa H3 The path to actionable cyber threat intelligence H3 Using OpSec to protect yourself at security industry events H3 Avoiding cyber disaster H3 Todayโs cyber threat landscape and mitigating appropriately H3 What's new in ransomware and how can businesses stay ahead of the threat? H3 Disinformation effort targeted at EU Parliament Elections H3 How security & intelligence can share the same language H3 Free Boxing Streams are being hidden on the most popular video sites H3 Understanding the modern ransomware landscape H3 Cyber Threats: How to manage intelligence in a multi-risk environment H3 Top 10 cybersecurity startups from Amsterdam that help you fight off hackers H3 Lessons learned from Ukraine elections H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ ink Middle East partnership H3 Psychological Warfare and Information Operations: The Real Threat to Western Dem H3 Election Hacking H3 German Politicians Personal Details Hacked H3 Russia Or The Far-Right: Who Hacked German Politics? H3 How not to get hacked in 2019 H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 5 Things We Know about the German Hack, from Porn to Mirrors H3 Why We Should Focus on โHow,โ not โWho,โ of Cyberattacks H3 Spike in Brexit-themed phishing attacks expected once withdrawal agreement is fi H3 Why is โAttributionโ Still the Focus Following Cyber Attacks? H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for infrastructures with new integrat H3 UK foils more than 10 cyber attacks per week, says GCHQ H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 Brings Improved Collaboration and Data Management Featur H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 Cyber security: Your boss doesn't care and that's not OK anymore H3 European Threat Intelligence provider EclecticIQ Increases North American invest H3 6 most talented online entrepreneurs in the Netherlands that deserve your attent H3 The Vulnerability Disclosure Process Still Broken H3 Batten down the ports: Linux networking bug SegmentSmack could remotely crash sy H3 Inzicht in digitale dreigingen H3 The digital โbank jobโ โ investigating the unprecedented rise in crypto threats H3 Tour de France 2018 live stream sites that let cycling fans watch race online fo H3 Adjusting to GDPR compliance challenges for threat intelligence analysts H3 Typical 24: Joep Gommers, EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ integrates with MITREโs ATT&CK framework H3 A Different Kind Of Heist: How Cryptocurrency Is Churning Profits For Criminals H3 The evolution of the cyber threat landscape โ whatโs next? H3 GDPRโs Impact On Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Data Breach H3 Ticketmaster security breach - the industry speaks H3 World Cup streaming: Free live feeds online can endanger football fans who try t H3 World Cup Russian hacking threat is real, security experts warn H3 Why The North Korean Cyber Threat Shouldn't be Ignored H3 Effectively Managing Mistrust for Optimal Cybersecurity H3 Working with Competitors H3 10 Dutch Startups to Watch in 2018 H3 10 amazing start-ups from Amsterdam to watch H3 The World Cup in motion: the infrastructure behind the greatest show on earth H3 Cybersecurity Managing Distrust: The Key To Cybersecurity H3 Will Threat Intelligence Go Dark Under GDPR? H3 The impact of GDPR on threat intelligence analysts H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 Identifying can be a waste of time H3 The great attribution debate: Why we should focus on HOW not WHO H3 Going for gold in the Cyber Olympics: a look at cybersecurity in Pyeongchang H3 Cyberattacks In An Evolving Landscape โ Should Businesses Be Worried? H3 ะะฒัะพะผะฐัะธะทะฐัะธั ะฟัะพัะตััะพะฒ ะบะธะฑะตััะฐะทะฒะตะดะบะธ ะฝะฐ ะพัะฝะพะฒะต ัะตัะตะฝะธะน ะบะปะฐััะฐ Threat Intelligen H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 How to protect against the evolving threat landscape H3 Fortune Term Sheet H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Amsterdam-based EclecticIQ secures โฌ14 million to further expand with its Cyber H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Ben Verwaayen steekt miljoenen in Nederlandse beveiligings-start-up H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 Cyber threat analysis training โ why a robust platform is critical H3 New infosec products of the weekโ: October 6, 2017 H3 EclecticIQ baut deutsches Team aus H3 The hottest startups in Amsterdam H3 Drei Ebenen der IT-Sicherheit H3 The UK's ยฃ1.9bn cyber-security spend โ getting the priorities right H3 Interview with Raymon van der Velde, VP Product & Co-founder EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ partners with SenseCy to bring leading Cyber Threat Intelligence tech H3 โCyberdreigingsinformatie nieuw antwoord op cyberaanvallenโ H3 Minister-president Rutte brengt bezoekt aan The Hague Security Delta H3 Plug Pulled on Soltra Edge Threat Info Sharing Platform H3 NZITF deploys EclecticIQ to share cyber threat information H3 WIRED Security 2016: Startup Stage H3 Daar komen de whizzkids H3 TechRound Cybersecurity40 2025 H3 Top 250 Scaleups 2022 H3 EclecticIQ Is Certified to ISO Standards H3 Top 250 Fastest Growing Companies H3 Infosec Awards H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Cyber Defense Magazine 2019 Infosec Award H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Next Unicorn Award 2018 H3 Cyber Defense 2018 Global Awards Winner H3 MKB Innovatie Top 100 van 2018 H3 SC 2018 Awards Europe H3 Top250 Scale-ups 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2017 H3 SC Magazine Lab Approved 2017 H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: heading levels step down one at a time, without jumping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2025 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>News & Awards</title> <meta name="description" content=""/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerror=o.onbeforeload=function(e){var n=e.type[0];if(s&&"hideFocus"in o)try{o.sheet.cssText.length||(n="e")}catch(e){n="e"}if("e"==n&&(c+=1)<f)return h(t,r,i,c);r(t,n,e.dโฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread full articleโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 3 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ, โread full articleโ, โread moreโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/11/20/new-chrome-safari-firefox-edge-warning-do-not-shop-on-these-websites/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" reโฆ <a href="https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/silkspecter-scam-ring-spoofs-big-brands-this-black-friday/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="smโฆ <a href="https://www.pcworld.com/article/2522574/watch-out-for-fake-online-stores-as-black-friday-approaches.html" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <sโฆ <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/lindseychoo/2024/11/20/black-friday-ai-scams-how-to-spot-them/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="smโฆ <a href="https://thehackernews.com/2024/11/fake-discount-sites-exploit-black.html" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncateโฆ <a href="https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/fraud-network-uses-4-700-fake-shopping-sites-to-steal-credit-cards/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofโฆ <a href="https://cyberinsider.com/silkspecter-campaign-uses-4000-fake-domains-against-black-friday-shoppers/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span cโฆ <a href="https://www.darkreading.com/cloud-security/socially-savvy-scattered-spider-traps-cloud-admins-in-web" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span โฆ <a href="https://cyberpress.org/new-developer-as-a-service-on-hacking-forums/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Reโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down; the heading structure skips a level in 1 place(s), so the order does not follow The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 News & Awards H3 New Black Friday WarningโDo Not Shop On These Websites level jumped H3 'SilkSpecter' hacking operation uses sophisticated ring of 4,700 spoofed storefr H3 Watch out for fake online stores as Black Friday approaches H3 Why Black Friday Is A Hotbed For AI ScamsโAnd How To Spot Them H3 Fake Discount Sites Exploit Black Friday to Hijack Shopper Information H3 Fraud network uses 4,700 fake shopping sites to steal credit cards H3 โSilkSpecterโ Campaign Uses 4,000 Fake Domains Against Black Friday Shoppers H3 Socially Savvy Scattered Spider Traps Cloud Admins in Web H3 New Developer-as-a-Service on Hacking Forums Fuels Phishing and Cyberattacks H3 Oyster Backdoor Spreading via Trojanized Popular Software Downloads H3 'ONNX' MFA Bypass Targets Microsoft 365 Accounts H3 ONNX phishing service targets Microsoft 365 accounts at financial firms H3 Cyber espionage strikes Indiaโs defence and energy sectors H3 Massive Phishing Campaign Strikes Latin America: Venom RAT Targeting Multiple Se H3 Cyberespionage Campaign Targets Government, Energy Entities in India H3 Episode March 27, 2024 H3 Hackers Hit Indian Defense, Energy Sectors with Malware Posing as Air Force Invi H3 India's government, energy sector breached in cyber-espionage campaign H3 Chinese Hackers Attacking Semiconductor Industries Using Cobalt Strike Beacon H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Chinese Hackers Target Semiconductor Firms in East Asia with Cobalt Strike H3 Podcast Episode 43- Cody Barrow - Cybersecurity in the European Union Compared t H3 Episode September 1, 2023 H3 Key Group Ransomware Foiled by New Decryptor H3 Free Key Group ransomware decryptor helps victims recover data H3 Good news for Key Group ransomware victims: Free decryptor out now H3 PDF lures aimed at NATO countries contain a Russian clue H3 Manually patch this Zimbra bug that's under attack H3 The art of managing cyber risk H3 Private equity 'presents cyber security risk' for asset managers H3 [FIC 2023] : les gangs de ransomware sont-ils des entreprises comme les autres ? H3 Cybersecurity misconceptions H3 De toekomst van cybercrime H3 LockBit crew cooks up half-baked Mac ransomware H3 Dark Pink APT group linked to new KamiKakiBot attacks in Southeast Asia H3 KamiKakaBot Malware Used in Latest Dark Pink APT Attacks on Southeast Asian Targ H3 Logiciel malveillant KamiKakaBot utilisรฉ dans les derniรจres attaques APT rose fo H3 DeFi Hack Recovers Stolen Funds; Blacklotus Bypasses Windows Secure Boot H3 10 European defence tech startups to watch, according to investors H3 PassW0rd H3 2023 - Threat Intelligence Predictions H3 NATO Innovation and Technology Issue #8 H3 Russian hackers targeting Dutch gas terminal: report H3 'Russische hackers hebben het gemunt op Nederlandse gasinstallaties' H3 Comprendre le fonctionnement des hackers pour une meilleure cyber sรฉcuritรฉ H3 Collaboration is key to a stronger cyber resilience, says cybersecurity expert H3 The Top of the Netherlands H3 Soonicorn Club 2022: Top Tech Startups In Netherlands H3 EclecticIQ, Protection Contre la Cybercriminalitรฉ H3 Das Beste fรผr Daten? Sichere Kรคfighaltung! H3 Van Huffelens overvolle agenda: van datacenters tot nepnieuws H3 Six Innovative Cybersecurity Companies in the Netherlands H3 The Other Scary Virus H3 Delen van Dreigingsinformatie Als Interessante Business H3 Article FD: Cyber Security Organisations Call for National Government to Take Co H3 IT-beveiligers Pleiten voor Landelijke Regie in Strijd Tegen Cybercriminaliteit H3 EU Invests Millions in Cybersecurity H3 Europees Geld voor Expansie EclecticIQ H3 Investment Plan for Europe Supports Development of Next-generation Cyber Securit H3 Peeters biedt Dedonder Europees geld voor Belgische defensie aan H3 EIB-geld Moet Wereldspeler Maken van Nederlands Cyberveiligheidsbedrijf Eclectic H3 Biden: โCyber breach of great consequenceโ may lead to โreal shooting warโ H3 WeChat Suspends New User Registrations to Comply with Chinese laws H3 IBM Contributes Kestrel Threat Hunting Tool to OASIS Open Cybersecurity Alliance H3 SolarWinds Hackers Strike Again: Kremlin-backed Group Hits Microsoft Customers H3 Risky Biz Soap Box: EclecticIQ's CEO Joep Gommers on Operationalising Threat Int H3 EclecticIQ Platform Delivers Threat Intelligence, Hunting, and Response Capabili H3 EclecticIQ platform: Intelligence at the Core H3 ASM Tech spurts 5% after partnership with Netherlands-based EclecticIQ for new C H3 Fake COVID contact tracers H3 The evolution of ransomware threats in the energy sector H3 CyberKnight, EclecticIQ Augment Threat Detection, Hunting And Response H3 Z-CERT and EclecticIQ Cooperate to Bring Benefits of CTI to Dutch Healthcare Sec H3 EclecticIQ - Samen investeren in een Europees cybersecurity ecosysteem H3 EclecticIQ and PolyLogyx join forces to bring intelligence-led security products H3 EclecticIQ Joins Forces with Endpoint Solution Provider PolyLogyx H3 EclecticIQ: Building Next-Gen Intelligence-Powered Cybersecurity H3 Typosquatting & duplication of pharmaceutical domain: Possibly used for phishing H3 How diverse teams can help protect your business against cyber-attacks H3 Hacking as a Service? H3 EclecticIQโs new browser extension helps analysts capture threat indicators auto H3 EclecticIQ continues its global expansion, reaching significant milestones in 20 H3 Top Dutch startups to follow in 2020 H3 Kaspersky partners with EclecticIQ to empower businesses with first-hand threat- H3 How will the UK tech sector be affected by Brexit? H3 Data Privacy Day: Security industry highlights key issues H3 Amsterdam Startups to Watch in 2020 H3 Going for gold: Security learnings for the Tokyo 2020 Olympics H3 Threat Intelligence H3 EclecticIQ hires Michel de Jong as Chief Operating Officer H3 How fake news could ruin Britain's next election H3 Cybersecurity giants join forces to combat cyberthreats under OASIS umbrella H3 Threat intelligence and the role of automation in improving security H3 Product Review - EclecticIQ Platform 2.4 H3 Maximizing the Use of Enterprise Cyber-Threat Intelligence Feeds H3 Communication, communication, communication: the route to actionable cyber threa H3 The path to actionable cyber threat intelligence H3 Using OpSec to protect yourself at security industry events H3 Avoiding cyber disaster H3 Todayโs cyber threat landscape and mitigating appropriately H3 What's new in ransomware and how can businesses stay ahead of the threat? H3 Disinformation effort targeted at EU Parliament Elections H3 How security & intelligence can share the same language H3 Free Boxing Streams are being hidden on the most popular video sites H3 Understanding the modern ransomware landscape H3 Cyber Threats: How to manage intelligence in a multi-risk environment H3 Top 10 cybersecurity startups from Amsterdam that help you fight off hackers H3 Lessons learned from Ukraine elections H3 Spire Solutions and EclecticIQ ink Middle East partnership H3 Psychological Warfare and Information Operations: The Real Threat to Western Dem H3 Election Hacking H3 German Politicians Personal Details Hacked H3 Russia Or The Far-Right: Who Hacked German Politics? H3 How not to get hacked in 2019 H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 Hackers leak details of German politicians H3 5 Things We Know about the German Hack, from Porn to Mirrors H3 Why We Should Focus on โHow,โ not โWho,โ of Cyberattacks H3 Spike in Brexit-themed phishing attacks expected once withdrawal agreement is fi H3 Why is โAttributionโ Still the Focus Following Cyber Attacks? H3 EclecticIQ strengthens threat intelligence for infrastructures with new integrat H3 UK foils more than 10 cyber attacks per week, says GCHQ H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 Brings Improved Collaboration and Data Management Featur H3 EclecticIQ Platform 2.3 brings improved collaboration and data management featur H3 Cyber security: Your boss doesn't care and that's not OK anymore H3 European Threat Intelligence provider EclecticIQ Increases North American invest H3 6 most talented online entrepreneurs in the Netherlands that deserve your attent H3 The Vulnerability Disclosure Process Still Broken H3 Batten down the ports: Linux networking bug SegmentSmack could remotely crash sy H3 Inzicht in digitale dreigingen H3 The digital โbank jobโ โ investigating the unprecedented rise in crypto threats H3 Tour de France 2018 live stream sites that let cycling fans watch race online fo H3 Adjusting to GDPR compliance challenges for threat intelligence analysts H3 Typical 24: Joep Gommers, EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ integrates with MITREโs ATT&CK framework H3 A Different Kind Of Heist: How Cryptocurrency Is Churning Profits For Criminals H3 The evolution of the cyber threat landscape โ whatโs next? H3 GDPRโs Impact On Threat Intelligence Sharing H3 Data Breach H3 Ticketmaster security breach - the industry speaks H3 World Cup streaming: Free live feeds online can endanger football fans who try t H3 World Cup Russian hacking threat is real, security experts warn H3 Why The North Korean Cyber Threat Shouldn't be Ignored H3 Effectively Managing Mistrust for Optimal Cybersecurity H3 Working with Competitors H3 10 Dutch Startups to Watch in 2018 H3 10 amazing start-ups from Amsterdam to watch H3 The World Cup in motion: the infrastructure behind the greatest show on earth H3 Cybersecurity Managing Distrust: The Key To Cybersecurity H3 Will Threat Intelligence Go Dark Under GDPR? H3 The impact of GDPR on threat intelligence analysts H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 Identifying can be a waste of time H3 The great attribution debate: Why we should focus on HOW not WHO H3 Going for gold in the Cyber Olympics: a look at cybersecurity in Pyeongchang H3 Cyberattacks In An Evolving Landscape โ Should Businesses Be Worried? H3 ะะฒัะพะผะฐัะธะทะฐัะธั ะฟัะพัะตััะพะฒ ะบะธะฑะตััะฐะทะฒะตะดะบะธ ะฝะฐ ะพัะฝะพะฒะต ัะตัะตะฝะธะน ะบะปะฐััะฐ Threat Intelligen H3 The evolving threat landscape: nation state, third party attacks and cyber vanda H3 How to protect against the evolving threat landscape H3 Fortune Term Sheet H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Amsterdam-based EclecticIQ secures โฌ14 million to further expand with its Cyber H3 14 miljoen voor Amsterdamse startup die bedrijven veilig houdt H3 Ben Verwaayen steekt miljoenen in Nederlandse beveiligings-start-up H3 EclecticIQ launches Fusion Center Intelligence Essentials H3 Cyber threat analysis training โ why a robust platform is critical H3 New infosec products of the weekโ: October 6, 2017 H3 EclecticIQ baut deutsches Team aus H3 The hottest startups in Amsterdam H3 Drei Ebenen der IT-Sicherheit H3 The UK's ยฃ1.9bn cyber-security spend โ getting the priorities right H3 Interview with Raymon van der Velde, VP Product & Co-founder EclecticIQ H3 EclecticIQ partners with SenseCy to bring leading Cyber Threat Intelligence tech H3 โCyberdreigingsinformatie nieuw antwoord op cyberaanvallenโ H3 Minister-president Rutte brengt bezoekt aan The Hague Security Delta H3 Plug Pulled on Soltra Edge Threat Info Sharing Platform H3 NZITF deploys EclecticIQ to share cyber threat information H3 WIRED Security 2016: Startup Stage H3 Daar komen de whizzkids H3 TechRound Cybersecurity40 2025 H3 Top 250 Scaleups 2022 H3 EclecticIQ Is Certified to ISO Standards H3 Top 250 Fastest Growing Companies H3 Infosec Awards H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Cyber Defense Magazine 2019 Infosec Award H3 Cybersecurity Excellence Award H3 Next Unicorn Award 2018 H3 Cyber Defense 2018 Global Awards Winner H3 MKB Innovatie Top 100 van 2018 H3 SC 2018 Awards Europe H3 Top250 Scale-ups 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2018 H3 Softshell Vendor Award 2017 H3 SC Magazine Lab Approved 2017 H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โread moreโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="https://techround.co.uk/cybersecurity/7-eclecticiq/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ <a href="https://ece.nl/top250scaleups2022/?utm_campaign=GLOB%20-%20Campaign%20-%20Corporate&utm_content=210811680&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin&hss_channel=lcp-10226527" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide foโฆ <a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/eclecticiq-is-certified-to-iso-standards?hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none โฆ <a href="https://cyberdefenseawards.com/infosec-awards-for-2020-winners/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Readโฆ <a href="https://cybersecurity-excellence-awards.com/candidates/eclecticiq-platform-3/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none โฆ <a href="https://cyberdefenseawards.com" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span> <svg xmlns="http://wโฆ <a href="https://cybersecurity-excellence-awards.com/2019-cybersecurity-product-awards-winners-and-finalists/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <spโฆ <a href="https://www.amsterdambusinessawards.nl/_cms/awards/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ <a href="https://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com/" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span> <svg xmlns="hโฆ <a href="https://www.kvkinnovatietop100.nl/site/top-100-2018" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-blue-400 mt-auto leading-tight" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Read more</span>โฆ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||||||||||||||
| DS28 | fail | one link to sources on other sites was refused when it was checked. The page is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser. It is listed in the view | |||||||||||||||||||
What we check For a single page, the share of its links to OTHER sites, sampled, that lead nowhere. The site's own links are assessed separately. What good looks like The page's references to other sites open for any reader. Where one refuses or has gone, the page carries the fact itself, shows the reference as plain text rather than as a link, or points to a source that answers. Why it matters The outside sources this page offers as support did not answer when they were asked for, so what the page claims is left resting on material that does not come back. In a regulated setting, where a link is carrying a figure or a required statement, that is the difference between a claim that is evidenced and one that is merely asserted. What we found on this page one link to sources on other sites was refused when it was checked. The page is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser. It is listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served The external links checked on this page, with the status each returned
A link that did not open appears here in two forms. A DEAD link points at a page that has gone. A REFUSED link points at a page that is still published, but the other site turns away requests that do not come from a person using a browser, so our request was declined. Both land in the same place: the material this page offers as its support did not come back when it was asked for. The consequence is not a matter of tidiness. Where a link carries the weight of a claim, a figure, a policy or a regulatory statement, and the target does not open, the support behind that claim is missing at the moment it is needed. Three things follow, and each of them costs the organisation. The same fact gets taken from somewhere else, which hands a third party control of how the claim is worded. Or the claim is treated as unsupported and set aside. Or an answer is drawn from what remains on the page, and a partial account is presented as a complete one. A refused link is the worst of the three, because the page still reads as though the evidence sits one step away, so the gap is invisible and the answer carries false confidence. A refusal by another site is still this site's matter to resolve, because this site chose to rest a claim on it. Three practical ways close it. Carry the fact being relied on in the page's own words, so the claim stands without the visit. Keep the reference but stop making it a link, showing the address as plain text, so nothing promises a route that does not open. Or point to a source that answers any reader. Where the reference has to stay live, say beside it what a reader will meet, so no one is sent to a closed door without warning.
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's references to other sites open for any reader. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 15 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide whether content can be reached and read at all, so it carries the heaviest weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||
▸https://www.eclecticiq.com/threat-intelligence-platform 53.7% Likely 9 out of 43
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT32 | warning | length 172 | |||||||
What we check The meta description's length is usable, between 50 and 170 characters. What good looks like The meta description's length is usable, long enough to say something and short enough not to be cut. Why it matters Too short says nothing and too long gets cut, so the summary field is spent without doing its job. What we found on this page length 172 The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's description, as served
<meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> | |||||||||
| CT16 | warning | the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) | |||||||
What we check The page carries structured data, the machine-readable summary of what it describes. What good looks like The page carries structured data summarising what it describes. Why it matters Vendors document this as optional rather than required, so its absence is a small forfeit and no more. What we found on this page the page carries no structured data block stating what it is (not required; a hygiene signal) The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a structured data block describing what the page is. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||
| CT04 | warning | the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content | |||||||
What we check The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. What good looks like The page carries a date, ideally written into the markup rather than sitting only in the text. Why it matters An undated page gives nothing to weigh its age against, so old and new material are treated alike. What we found on this page the page shows the year 2024 in its text, but nothing on the page states it as the date of the content The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The head of the page was read for a tag stating the date of the content. The year shown above was found in the page's own text. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||
| CT35 | warning | the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere | |||||||
What we check The copyright line at the foot of the page, and the year it states. What good looks like The copyright line states the current year. Why it matters A copyright year in the past reads as a page nobody has attended to, and it is the usual sign of a template copied from somewhere else. Either way an AI treats the content as stale and can present old material as current. What we found on this page the copyright line at the foot of this page states 2024, 2 years behind the year this assessment ran, which reads as a page left unattended and is the usual sign of a template copied from elsewhere The evidence, taken from the page as served The copyright line as served, and the year it claims
| |||||||||
| AJ05 | warning | no site-search control detected on this page | |||||||
What we check Whether a search box for the site is present in the page as it is served. What good looks like A search box is present in the served markup, so the site's own content can be queried directly. Why it matters With no search box on the page, its links are the only route from here into the rest of the site. What we found on this page no site-search control detected on this page The evidence, taken from the page as served The head of this page, as served
The page was read for a search box: a search form, a control named for search, or a box labelled as one. <head> <meta charset="utf-8"/> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=no, viewport-fit=cover"/> <meta name="referrer" content="origin-when-cross-origin"/> <title>Threat Intelligence Platform</title> <meta name="description" content="Empower your team with AI-embedded threat intelligence capabilities to prioritize critical threats, make faster security decisions, and strengthen defenses against threats."/> <meta property="og:image" content="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/public/rebrand-2024/assets/img/og-eclecticiq.png"/> <script>loadjs=function(){var l=function(){},c={},f={},u={};function s(e,n){if(e){var t=u[e];if(f[e]=n,t)for(;t.length;)t[0](e,n),t.splice(0,1)}}function o(e,n){e.call&&(e={success:e}),n.length?(e.error||l)(n):(e.success||l)(e)}function h(t,r,i,c){var s,o,e=document,n=i.async,f=(i.numRetries||0)+1,u=i.before||l,a=t.replace(/^(css|img)!/,"");c=c||0,/(^css!|\.css$)/.test(t)?(s=!0,(o=e.createElement("link")).rel="stylesheet",o.href=a):/(^img!|\.(png|gif|jpg|svg)$)/.test(t)?(o=e.createElement("img")).src=a:((o=e.createElement("script")).src=t,o.async=void 0===n||n),!(o.onload=o.onerrorโฆ | |||||||||
| MS08 | fail | 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view | |||||||
What we check Links that share exactly the same wording on one page while pointing at different destinations. What good looks like Links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. Why it matters The wording no longer settles the target, so the wrong one gets followed at the point where the choice matters. What we found on this page 1 link wording(s) are used for more than one destination, so the same words point at different pages: โbook a demoโ; the links are listed in the view The evidence, taken from the page as served Links that share the same text but point to different destinations, as served
<a href="https://www.eclecticiq.com/book-a-demo?hsLang=en" target="_blank" class="relative group inline-flex items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide hover:pr-12 transition-all duration-200"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absoโฆ <a href="" class="relative flex xs:inline-flex justify-center items-center h-12 px-8 rounded-full font-bold bg-blue text-nav text-white leading-none tracking-wide"> <span class="flex-none">Book a demo</span> <img class="lazyload absolute -top-2 right-2 w-4 scale-110" src="https://www.eclecticiq.com/hubfs/raw_assets/pubโฆ Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: links that share the same wording lead to the same destination. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS10 | fail | the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down | |||||||
What we check A page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What good looks like The page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. Why it matters Content under a skipped level has no clear parent section, so structure taken from the page misplaces its text. What we found on this page the page's first heading is not its top-level heading, so the structure starts part way down The evidence, taken from the page as served The page's heading outline, in document order (a jump in level is marked)
H3 Products level jumped H3 Use Cases H3 Partners H3 Resources H3 Company H1 Intelligence Center: The AI-embedded Threat Intelligence Platform H2 What our Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) can do H3 1. Direction & planning H4 1. Direction & planning H3 2. Data collection H4 2. Data collection H3 3. Processing H4 3. Processing H3 4. Analysis H4 4. Analysis H3 5. Actioning & production H4 5. Actioning & production H3 6. Dissemination & feedback H4 6. Dissemination & feedback H2 How you can use our TIP H2 How our TIP helps your team H3 CTI Analysts H3 SOC Analysts H3 Cybersecurity Leaders and CISO H3 MSSPs H2 Learn more about Intelligence Center H3 Download the Threat Intelligence Platform product sheet H3 Read our latest blogs H3 Get access to our latest reports H2 Talk to one of our experts H3 (no text)
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the page's headings start at the top level and step down without skipping a level. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||||
| MS09 | warning | link wording that does not say where it leads: โlearn moreโ | |||||||
What we check Link wording that names no destination, phrases such as click here, read more and details. What good looks like Link wording names its destination, rather than saying click here or read more. Why it matters The destination is stated nowhere on the link itself, so the choice rests entirely on the text around it. What we found on this page link wording that does not say where it leads: โlearn moreโ The evidence, taken from the page as served The links whose text names no destination, as served
<a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="#" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white absolute bottom-5 right-8"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewbox="0 0 31 31" class="hidden xs:bโฆ <a href="https://blog.eclecticiq.com?type=intelligence-research&hsLang=en" class="group inline-flex items-center gap-2 lg:gap-3 max-w-full font-bold text-sm xl:text-base leading-tight tracking-wide font-semibold text-white mt-auto leading-tight"> <span class="sm:flex-none truncate">Learn more</span> <svg xmlns="httโฆ | |||||||||
| MS13 | warning | 2 of 2 iframes untitled | |||||||
What we check Each embedded panel on the page carries a title saying what it contains. What good looks like Each embedded panel carries a title saying what it contains. Why it matters The embedded region stays unnamed, so what it holds is left unstated in the page around it. What we found on this page 2 of 2 iframes untitled The evidence, taken from the page as served The iframes with no title attribute, as served
<iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> <iframe src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-MC7MVC" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"/> | |||||||||
PDF documents 1 documents
The first documents discovered on the estate, scored separately from pages.
▸https://networkingplus.co.uk/Media/Default/archive/Net2003.pdf 0.0% Likely 1 out of 2
| Check | Result | Evidence | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PD07 | fail | the document could not be fetched: its address answers "not found" (404), so the link from the site is broken and there is nothing behind it to read | |||||
What we check Whether each document the site links can actually be fetched and opened, before anything inside it is judged. What good looks like The document fetches and opens. A FAIL means it could not be fetched at all, a broken link (not found) or an address that does not deliver the file, so its readiness is measured at zero and the missing detail raises misinformation likelihood to the middle of the scale. Why it matters A linked document that cannot be fetched is detail out of reach: whatever it held cannot be read or checked by anyone, so answers that lean on it are built without it, and the broken link itself reads as a site not being kept. What we found on this page the document could not be fetched: its address answers "not found" (404), so the link from the site is broken and there is nothing behind it to read The evidence, taken from the page as served The document's address, as linked from the site
Why it reads as a failure The result is set by what was measured on this item, quoted above, and not by an opinion of it. It reads as a failure because the standard was not met: the document fetches and opens. What it does to the figure This check counts toward the readiness figure for this item, at a weight of 3 out of a possible 5, because it is one of the checks that decide how cleanly content can be read once reached, so it carries a middle weight in the figure for this item. Why it moves the misinformation reading This failure could contribute to a wrong answer in some cases, so it raises the misinformation reading for this item. Where an item carries more than one such failure, the readings compound and the item moves up the scale. What this result does not say This says what was found on this item at the time of assessment, and nothing beyond it: it is not a statement about the rest of the estate, and it does not judge the quality of the content itself. | |||||||
How the scores work method & bands
This report is Stage 1, Foundations: each automated test the engine can run without human input, so there is a usable result at the first stage. Governance (owner-confirmed truth) and Visibility (how AI agents find the estate) are later stages and are shown greyed above.
What was assessed. 37 pages were assessed, selected from 120 reviewed using the site's own signals of importance (its navigation, homepage links, most-linked pages, sitemap, and any llms.txt file), and the first 1 PDF documents found were assessed separately. The industry in the header is classified from the site's own content. The traffic classification comes from a recognised top-sites list or a connected traffic provider; it reads NA when the domain is not connected to a traffic source.
Header identity signals. The regulated sector and listed company values are inferred from the same crawled content, and shown here so the header can stay to the answer alone. Regulated sector reads “None found”: no regulator statements, and the established sector carries no statutory regulator. Listed company reads “Not established”: no clear public-listing indicators in the sampled pages.
AI readiness is the weighted share of checks that passed, reported separately for pages and for PDF documents because each is reached and corrected differently. Grade A checks decide whether content can be reached and read at all; grade B whether it is understood correctly; grade C support reliability. A measured score is scaled into a ceiling when an access gate binds it (for example the site blocking AI crawlers at its edge): content that cannot be reached is not partially ready. Scores never read exactly 25, 50, 75 or 100, because those are buckets, not measurements.
Likelihood of misinformation is a band, given as a worst case (the highest any single item or estate-wide finding reaches) and a typical position across the pages or documents. Only checks whose failure is a direct route to a wrong answer carry a band; the rest affect readiness only.
| Band | Range | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Likely zero | 0-5% | No failing misinformation-bearing checks. |
| Very little | 6-25% | Unlikely to cause wrong information. |
| Likely | 26-50% | Could contribute to wrong information in some cases. |
| Very likely | 51-75% | A real and common route to wrong information. |
| Extremely likely | 76-100% | A frequent and direct cause of wrong information. |
Of the register's 187 checks, 85 ran automatically in this Foundations stage. 64 are governance questions for the next stage. The remainder need organisation-supplied data or an external service; each check that did not run is listed in the exports.
About us
Built on evidence, not assumptions.
We have been doing this for 25 years. For the last two years, we have been training AI to understand and map AI Readiness (fundamentals, governance, visibility), against our unique dataset of more than 3.7 trillion data points.
3.7
Trillion
Data points, with each result kept since the beginning: probably the largest experience and compliance dataset of its kind. Our AI is trained on factual, controlled, real-world evidence.
$106
Billion
Estimated manual effort avoided through automation. An estimate, and a conservative one: since ARTY was introduced, we have removed 95% of costs and delivered efficiency gains beyond 70x.
119
Million
Websites analysed and mapped for content fundamentals, from the outside in. AI Readiness begins by removing the human issues that undermine Value and create unnecessary Risk.
25
Years
When we started, we were labelled 'the pioneers' of website automation and checking. In 2023, we launched our first AI analysis tools.
Who’s talking about us
