Skip to main content

Security report for aeger.no

Aeger Group · Other · Norway

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Aeger Group is a Norwegian consulting company specializing in securing high-risk assets and establishing emergency preparedness capabilities internationally. Their market position is that of a specialized security consultancy offering a broad range of services including cybersecurity, risk management, crisis handling, training, and travel security. The company targets organizations requiring robust security and risk mitigation solutions globally. The website reflects a professional business model focused on consulting and training services with a clear international orientation. Technically, the website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, utilizing modern web technologies such as Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, and third-party marketing tools like Leadfeeder and Pipedrive Leadbooster Chat. The site is mobile-optimized with good SEO practices and moderate performance. Accessibility is basic but functional. From a security perspective, the website enforces HTTPS and employs reCAPTCHA on its contact form, alongside a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism supporting GDPR compliance. However, it lacks explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and security headers, which are recommended for enhanced security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Overall, the website presents a trustworthy and professional front with good privacy compliance and business credibility. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust analysis, but the site content and contact details support legitimacy. Strategic improvements in security policy transparency and technical security headers would strengthen the security posture further.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

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

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. SSL/TLS

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

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching aeger.no

This scan found 20 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

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

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

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. 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
72
Security headers
60
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
75

Not counted

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

Findings that cap the score at 49

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

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

Partial scans

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

Risk levels

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

Aeger Group operates in the security consulting sector with a focus on international risk management and emergency preparedness. Their competitive advantage lies in offering integrated security operations center services (ASOC), tailored training programs, and comprehensive risk and crisis management solutions. The business model is service-oriented, targeting corporate clients with needs for cybersecurity, travel security, and business continuity. Revenue streams likely derive from consulting contracts, training courses, and subscription-based security monitoring services. The company maintains an active partnership ecosystem including marketing and analytics providers. Growth indicators include a diverse service portfolio and media presence. The company’s operations are centered in Norway with a small-sized organizational footprint.

Security posture

The current security maturity level of the website is moderate to good. HTTPS is enforced, and Google reCAPTCHA protects the contact form against automated abuse. The cookie consent mechanism is robust and GDPR-compliant, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. However, the absence of published security policies, incident response contacts, and security.txt files suggests gaps in transparency and formal incident management readiness. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The use of multiple third-party scripts introduces potential risk vectors that require regular auditing. Overall, the security culture appears professional but could benefit from enhanced documentation and technical security controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to harden the website against common attacks.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet recognized standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and tracking tools to mitigate potential security risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Aeger Group AS
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Aeger Group
Description
Aeger Group er et konsulentselskap som har spesialisert seg på sikring av risikoutsatte verdier og etablering av beredskapsevne internasjonalt.
Key services
Cybersecurity, Sikringsstyring, Risikostyring, Beredskap og krisehåndtering, Opplæring, Business continuity, Reisesikkerhet, Tekniske sikkerhetsundersøkelser (TSU), Aeger Security Operations Center (ASOC)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, Webflow CMS, jQuery 3.5.1, Lottie animations, Leadbooster Chat (Pipedrive), lftracker (Leadfeeder)
Frameworks
Webflow
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA on contact form
  • Cookie consent with granular options
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Leadfeeder
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Leadfeeder
Marketing tools
Leadfeeder, Pipedrive Leadbooster Chat
Transparency
good

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 challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable, limiting domain trust analysis.
  3. Website uses modern technologies and has good privacy and cookie consent mechanisms.
  4. Contact information is clearly provided with multiple channels.
  5. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  6. Content is professional and business-oriented with no adult or questionable material.
  7. Multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools are used with consent mechanisms.
  8. Website is built on Webflow CMS with custom scripts and integrations.
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages Webflow CMS, which provides a modern and responsive design framework. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking, along with Google reCAPTCHA for form security. Leadfeeder and Pipedrive Leadbooster Chat are used for marketing and customer engagement. The site loads with moderate speed and is mobile-optimized. The HTML and CSS are valid and well-structured, supporting good SEO. However, the lack of explicit hosting provider information and missing HTTP security headers indicates room for technical improvements. The use of multiple external domains for scripts and fonts is standard but requires ongoing security monitoring.
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 aeger.no. 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 aeger.no.

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.