Skip to main content

Security report for abalon.cz

Abalon s.r.o. · Other · Czech Republic

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

37/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Abalon s.r.o. is a small Czech company specializing in graphic design, quality offset printing, and website production services. The company targets businesses and individuals seeking professional design and printing solutions, including specialized products like New Year's cards (novoročenky). Their market position appears niche and local, focused on Prague and surrounding areas. The website is built on WordPress with a moderate technical infrastructure including jQuery and FlexSlider, and uses Google Analytics for visitor tracking. The site is accessible, well-structured, and professionally designed, though mobile optimization and accessibility features are basic. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities, but lacks important security headers and formal privacy or cookie policies, which impacts compliance and trust. WHOIS data is missing, which reduces domain legitimacy confidence, though the website content and contact information support a legitimate business presence. Overall, the site scores moderately well but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

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

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

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

Priority findings

11 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

  2. 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
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

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

Keep watching abalon.cz

This scan found 30 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
55
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
37

Not counted

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

Findings that cap the score at 49

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

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

Partial scans

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

Risk levels

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

The company operates as a service provider in the graphic design and printing sector, leveraging a WordPress-based website to showcase a broad portfolio of projects. Their business model is service-oriented, focusing on creative and printing solutions. The presence of related partner domains in the footer suggests a small ecosystem of associated sites. The company provides clear contact information and physical address, supporting credibility. However, the lack of WHOIS transparency and absence of privacy and cookie policies indicate areas for improvement in trust and compliance. The external links include some suspicious ticket-selling domains likely unrelated to the business, which may be due to injected or legacy content and should be reviewed. The company appears stable but small, with no evidence of subsidiaries or parent companies.

Security posture

The website benefits from HTTPS encryption and does not expose sensitive data in the HTML content. However, it lacks important HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security, which are recommended to mitigate common web attacks. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, limiting transparency for security issues. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. The use of standard WordPress and jQuery libraries is current, with no visible outdated or vulnerable components. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing security headers, formal privacy compliance, and incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance.
  2. Add HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency.
  4. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to maintain security.
  5. Review and remove suspicious or unrelated external links to improve trustworthiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Abalon, s.r.o.
Registration number
25265229
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Abalon s.r.o.
Description
Abalon s.r.o. is a company specializing in graphic design, quality offset printing, and website production.
Key services
Graphic design, Offset printing, Website production, New Year's cards (novoročenky)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 5.8.10, jQuery 3.6.0, jQuery Migrate 3.3.2, FlexSlider, Google Analytics (gtag.js), Typekit fonts
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Marketing tools
Typekit fonts
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating compliance gaps.
  3. WHOIS data is missing, limiting domain legitimacy verification.
  4. Contact information is clearly provided in the footer.
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with standard plugins and Google Analytics.
  6. External links include some suspicious ticket-selling domains likely unrelated to business.
  7. No forms detected on the homepage or main content.
  8. No social media links explicitly found.
  9. No security.txt or incident response contacts found.
  10. No certifications or security frameworks mentioned.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.8.10 with jQuery 3.6.0 and FlexSlider for UI components. It uses Typekit fonts and Google Analytics for tracking. The site loads moderately fast with a clean HTML structure and proper meta tags for SEO. Mobile optimization is basic but functional. Accessibility features are minimal and could be enhanced. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. No forms are present on the homepage, reducing attack surface but also limiting user interaction. The site would benefit from modernization of accessibility and security features to reduce technical debt and improve user experience.
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 abalon.cz. 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 abalon.cz.

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.