a(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
b(b) Incident handling: One indicator
c(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
d(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
e(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
f(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
g(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
h(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
i(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
j(j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside
Partly checked
One indicator
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
9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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
SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.
Critical
No email authentication configured
Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing
What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately
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"
This scan found 26 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
75
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
56
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
Breach exposure
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Dark web exposure
Add-on
Leaked records that mention alexandersenrevision.dk, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for alexandersenrevision.dk right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Business context
Business profile
Due to the absence of business content, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived from the website. The domain age suggests a potentially established business, but the placeholder content contradicts this. No market positioning, services, or target audience information is available. No partnerships or subsidiaries are indicated. The website does not currently support business operations or customer engagement.
Security posture
The security posture of the website is poor. There is no evidence of HTTPS/SSL usage, no security headers, and no privacy or cookie policies. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. The site does not follow basic security best practices, exposing it to risks such as data interception and lack of user trust. The absence of secure forms or contact channels further weakens the security posture.
Recommendations
Implement a fully functional website with clear business information and contact details.
Enable HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate to secure communications.
Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
Implement security headers and conduct a security audit to identify and remediate vulnerabilities.
Establish incident response and vulnerability disclosure processes to enhance security culture and trust.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
One.com default hosting placeholder detected. Website content is a default hosting placeholder page by One.com indicating no active website content. No business or security related content found. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.
Business
Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate
Technology
Stack
Montserrat font, One.com web hosting
SEO
poor
Analytics and tracking
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor
Advertising
Transparency
poor
Site quality
Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low
Key observations
Website is a default One.com hosting placeholder page
No business or security related content found
No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies present
No contact information or forms detected
No security headers or HTTPS detected in provided data
WHOIS data shows domain is active and registered since 2006
No external links or social media profiles found
No analytics or tracking scripts detected
No structured data (JSON-LD) or Open Graph metadata found
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.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with alexandersenrevision.dk. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review alexandersenrevision.dk.