Skip to main content

Security report for agwilsoncivilengineering.com

A.G. Wilson Limited · Energy · United Kingdom

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

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

A.G. Wilson Limited is a professional civil engineering firm with over 40 years of experience, offering services primarily in civil engineering, marine construction, and fusion welding across the UK, Ireland, and Europe. The company targets both private and public sector clients, positioning itself as a reliable mid-sized regional engineering service provider. The website reflects a professional digital presence with good content quality, clear navigation, and mobile optimization. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript libraries and Google analytics tools but lacks some advanced security headers and explicit security policies. The security posture is moderate with room for improvement in SSL configuration and security header implementation. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, which impacts overall trustworthiness despite the professional business presentation. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant, supporting basic privacy compliance. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced security measures and domain registration transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

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

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

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

Priority findings

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

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

    • High

      Missing 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';…

  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

  3. SSL/TLS

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

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

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

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

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

Keep watching agwilsoncivilengineering.com

This scan found 23 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
66

Not counted

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

Findings that cap the score at 49

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

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

Partial scans

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

Risk levels

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

The company operates in the energy and transportation sectors with a focus on sustainable infrastructure projects. Its business model is service-oriented, providing engineering expertise to both public and private clients. The firm has a strong local presence in Northern Ireland with certifications such as RoSPA awards enhancing its credibility. The website indicates active engagement with clients through news updates and social media channels. The partnership with Kyber Digital for web design suggests a professional approach to digital marketing. Growth indicators include recent awards and recognitions. However, the lack of visible domain registration details could pose reputational risks. The company’s competitive advantage lies in its long-standing industry experience and diversified service offerings.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level. It uses HTTPS (assumed from external scripts loaded via HTTPS) and implements cookie consent mechanisms, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. However, no HTTP security headers were detected in the HTML source, which is a missed opportunity to enhance protection against common web attacks. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which limits transparency in security management. The use of third-party analytics and tag management tools introduces potential privacy risks if not properly configured. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were found in the source. Overall, the security posture is adequate but requires improvements in security headers, explicit policies, and incident response readiness to meet higher compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Verify and strengthen SSL/TLS configuration to ensure robust encryption and trust.
  3. Publish explicit security and incident response policies to improve transparency and compliance.
  4. Conduct regular security audits of third-party scripts and dependencies to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
A.G. Wilson Limited
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
A.G. Wilson Limited
Description
A.G.Wilson Limited provides a comprehensive range of professional civil engineering services to both private and public sectors. Over 40 years, the business has diversified to satisfy customer demand across the UK, Ireland, and Europe. Primary categories include Civil Engineering, Marine Construction, and Fusion Welding.
Key services
Civil Engineering, Marine Construction, Fusion Welding
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Slippry slider, jCarousel, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google Fonts
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with POST method

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

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 professionally presented and relevant to civil engineering.
  3. Privacy and cookie policies are present and functional.
  4. WHOIS data is missing, indicating possible domain registration issues.
  5. Use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking.
  6. Contact information is clearly provided with company domain email and phone.
  7. No security headers detected in HTML source; potential improvement area.
  8. No terms of service or explicit security policy pages found.
  9. Social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn.
  10. Website uses modern JavaScript libraries and responsive design.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard web technologies including jQuery, Slippry slider, and jCarousel for UI components. Google Fonts and Google Tag Manager are used for typography and analytics respectively. The site is responsive and optimized for mobile devices with good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected but could benefit from optimization. There is no detected CMS, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Hosting provider details are not evident from the source. The site uses multiple Google Tag Manager containers, which may indicate complex tracking setups. Technical debt appears low but the absence of security headers and incomplete WHOIS data represent risks that could impact business operations and 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 agwilsoncivilengineering.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

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

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review agwilsoncivilengineering.com.

Feedback on this report

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

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

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