Skip to main content

Security report for 44bytes.net

44 Bytes Ltd · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

44 Bytes Ltd is a UK-based small technology company specializing in secure managed web hosting, internet security services, innovative web design, and comprehensive website management. The company targets businesses seeking reliable and secure internet services, positioning itself as a niche provider with a focus on intelligent and secure solutions. The website content is professional and clearly communicates the company's offerings and contact information, supporting its market presence. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including Google Fonts, Google Analytics, and Plausible Analytics for performance and user tracking. The site is mobile-optimized with good accessibility and SEO practices, although no CMS or hosting provider details are explicitly identified. Performance is moderate with room for improvement in security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. However, the absence of security headers, incident response policies, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates a moderate security posture. The WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy despite the professional business presentation. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency in domain registration, improved security headers, and explicit privacy and incident response policies to strengthen its security and compliance posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching 44bytes.net

This scan found 21 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
65
Security headers
65
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
71

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

44 Bytes Ltd operates in the technology sector, providing managed hosting, security, design, and web management services primarily to businesses. The company leverages its UK registration and client portfolio to establish credibility. Its business model is service-oriented, focusing on secure and intelligent internet solutions. The presence of known client logos suggests established partnerships and a positive market reputation. Growth potential exists through enhanced digital marketing and expanded service offerings. The company maintains a lean operation with a small size classification and targets SMEs and enterprises requiring secure web services. Strategic partnerships appear limited to LinkedIn presence, with no other partner domains identified.

Security posture

The security maturity level of 44 Bytes Ltd is moderate. The website enforces HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. However, the lack of security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No published security or incident response policies limit transparency and preparedness. GDPR compliance is partially addressed via a privacy policy, but cookie consent mechanisms are absent despite analytics usage. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present, reducing external security collaboration. Overall, the security culture appears basic with room for improvement in formal policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and explicit cookie policy to comply with GDPR and improve user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish detailed incident response and security policies to demonstrate preparedness and build trust with clients.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program and provide a security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Verify and update domain WHOIS registration information to ensure transparency and legitimacy of domain ownership.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
44 Bytes Ltd
Registration number
09132996
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
44 Bytes Ltd
Description
44 Bytes Ltd is a full-service provider of secure managed web hosting, internet security services, innovative web design and full-stack website management for your online business presence.
Key services
Managed Hosting, Internet Security, Innovative Design, Web Management
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Plausible Analytics, Google Fonts, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by external scripts loaded over HTTPS)
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Plausible Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Plausible Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF detected.
  2. Content is professional and business-focused on secure hosting and web services.
  3. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, limiting domain ownership verification.
  4. No cookie consent mechanism detected despite use of analytics.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. Contact information is clear and consistent across header and footer.
  7. Social media presence limited to LinkedIn.
  8. No forms detected on the homepage or main content.
  9. Use of modern web fonts and analytics scripts.
  10. No visible security headers detected in provided data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack with Google Fonts for typography and Google Analytics alongside Plausible Analytics for user tracking. JavaScript is used for interactive elements and analytics integration. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. However, no CMS or hosting provider is explicitly identified. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of analytics scripts to reduce blocking. The absence of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and privacy compliance. Opportunities exist to improve SSL/TLS configuration, implement security headers, and enhance privacy controls to reduce risk and improve user trust.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with 44bytes.net. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review 44bytes.net.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.