Skip to main content

Security report for alt-lichtenberg.de

Other · Germany

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

26/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website alt-lichtenberg.de appears to represent a small local or community-oriented entity based in Germany, as indicated by the German language and domain registration details. The site is built on WordPress 5.2.3 with an Apache server running PHP 7.2.34, which is outdated and may pose security risks. The content is minimal with no visible business description, contact information, or terms of service, limiting its professional appeal and user engagement. A cookie consent banner is present, indicating some awareness of privacy compliance, but the privacy policy is only linked and not detailed on the homepage. The site lacks HTTPS, which is a critical security deficiency, exposing visitors to potential risks. Social media presence is limited to a Facebook page link. Overall, the digital maturity of the site is low, with basic mobile optimization and minimal SEO or accessibility features.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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"

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

Keep watching alt-lichtenberg.de

This scan found 22 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
0
Average
26

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 business behind alt-lichtenberg.de is not clearly identified on the website, with no explicit company name, description, or contact details. The domain has been registered since 2008, suggesting some longevity, but the lack of detailed content and business information indicates a small-scale operation or a community project rather than a commercial enterprise. The site does not display any certifications, trust indicators, or partner relationships. The presence of a Facebook link suggests some social engagement, but no analytics or marketing tools are detected. The business model and target audience remain unclear due to the absence of descriptive content.

Security posture

Security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical vulnerability. The server runs an outdated PHP version (7.2.34), which no longer receives security updates, increasing exposure to exploits. No advanced security headers are implemented, and DNSSEC and CAA records are not enabled, reducing domain security. The cookie consent mechanism is present but basic. No incident response or security policies are published, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are found. Overall, the site is at risk of interception, data tampering, and other common web threats.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS site-wide immediately.
  2. Upgrade PHP to a currently supported version to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  3. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish clear contact information and business details to improve credibility and user trust.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance by providing a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie management options.
  6. Enable DNSSEC and CAA records to strengthen domain security.
  7. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to reduce security risks.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on an Apache 2.4.63 Unix server with PHP 7.2.34, running WordPress 5.2.3. The front-end uses jQuery, Font Awesome, Google Fonts, and several custom JavaScript libraries for UI and gallery functionality. The site lacks HTTPS, which is a major technical and security shortcoming. Performance metrics are unavailable, but the page size and resource count are zero, indicating minimal content or incomplete data capture. Mobile optimization is basic with viewport meta tags and some responsive CSS, but accessibility and SEO features are limited. The site uses a cookie notice plugin but no analytics or tracking scripts are detected. Hosting is provided by rzone.de, with DNS records showing no DNSSEC or CAA configuration. Overall, the technical infrastructure is outdated and requires modernization to meet current web standards.
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 alt-lichtenberg.de. 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 alt-lichtenberg.de.

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.