Skip to main content

Security report for alpirossl.cz

Alpiro s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Alpiro s.r.o. operates the website alpirossl.cz, offering a range of SSL certificates including domain validated, organization validated, extended validation, and S/MIME email signing certificates. The company targets businesses and website owners seeking affordable and reliable SSL solutions, emphasizing fast issuance and support for modern encryption standards. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with clear navigation and good mobile optimization. Technically, the site uses standard web technologies such as jQuery, Google Analytics, and Google Tag Manager for tracking. The site is moderately performant and mobile-friendly but lacks advanced accessibility features and comprehensive SEO optimizations. No CMS or hosting provider information is discernible from the content. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and uses secure forms but lacks visible security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, which are compliance gaps. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain is a significant concern, reducing trust in domain legitimacy. No direct contact emails or phone numbers are provided, only a contact form. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with better transparency and compliance documentation. The overall risk is moderate with recommendations to implement privacy and cookie policies, add security headers, and clarify domain registration details to enhance trust and compliance.

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

9 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

    • 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

  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 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 alpirossl.cz

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
80
Security headers
30
Email security
62
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
10
Average
51

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

Alpiro s.r.o. positions itself as a niche SSL certificate provider in the Czech market, focusing on affordable pricing and rapid certificate issuance. Their business model revolves around direct sales and a partner program, targeting small to medium businesses requiring SSL and email signing certificates. The company leverages modern encryption technologies and offers a 30-day money-back guarantee as a trust signal. The lack of WHOIS transparency and limited direct contact information may impact customer confidence. The company appears to maintain a focused product portfolio without evident diversification or subsidiaries.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security maturity level. HTTPS is enforced, and secure forms are implemented, but the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options is a notable gap. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR best practices. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security culture appears functional but could benefit from enhanced policies and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add essential security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to improve protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure procedures to build trust and readiness.
  4. Provide direct company contact information including verified emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data issue to enhance domain legitimacy and customer confidence.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Alpiro s.r.o.
Description
Alpiro s.r.o. offers SSL certificates including Domain Validation (DV), Organization Validation (OV), Extended Validation (EV), and S/MIME email signing certificates. They provide fast issuance, wildcard and multidomain options, ECC and IDN support, and a 30-day money-back guarantee.
Key services
Domain validated SSL certificates, Organization validated SSL certificates, Extended validation SSL certificates, S/MIME email signing certificates, Wildcard and multidomain SSL certificates
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 2.1.4, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, HTML5, CSS3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced (implied by domain and SSL product focus)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure contact form with required fields

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

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, which is a compliance gap.
  3. Contact information is only via a contact form; no direct emails or phone numbers provided.
  4. WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual and reduces domain trust.
  5. Website uses modern JavaScript libraries and tracking tools.
  6. Content is focused on SSL certificate sales and related services.
  7. No social media links or direct company contact emails found.
  8. No security headers detected in the HTML source.
  9. Good mobile responsiveness and navigation clarity.
  10. No explicit GDPR or data protection officer information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a traditional tech stack with jQuery 2.1.4 and Google Analytics for tracking. The HTML and CSS are valid and support responsive design for mobile devices. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of analytics scripts. No modern frameworks or CMS platforms are detected, indicating a custom or static site approach. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO could be improved with better meta descriptions and Open Graph tags. Hosting provider details are not discernible. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modernization and enhanced compliance features.
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 alpirossl.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 alpirossl.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.