Skip to main content

Security report for ames.aero

AMES - Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Services · Transportation · Austria

Critical risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 3 other checks.

Security score

23/100

Risk levelCritical

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

AMES - Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Services is a mature Austrian company specializing in aerospace engineering, certification, production, maintenance, CAMO, consulting, and training services. With a domain age of 17 years and multiple aerospace certifications, AMES positions itself as a reliable service provider in the aerospace transportation sector. The website reflects a professional business model targeting aerospace industry professionals and companies requiring specialized engineering and certification services. The company maintains a consistent brand presence with clear contact information and social media engagement. Technically, the website employs a variety of established JavaScript libraries and frameworks such as jQuery, Bootstrap, and Owl Carousel, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. However, the site lacks HTTPS encryption and modern security configurations, which significantly impacts its security posture. Performance is rated slow due to missing SSL and potential optimization gaps, though mobile responsiveness and navigation clarity are good. Security evaluation reveals critical vulnerabilities including the absence of SSL/TLS, no HSTS, no DNSSEC, and missing security headers. These gaps expose the site to potential interception and downgrade attacks. The domain's imminent expiry in 11 days adds operational risk. Privacy compliance is minimal, with basic privacy and terms documents available but no cookie consent or incident response contacts. Overall, AMES demonstrates solid business credibility and content quality but requires urgent security improvements to protect its digital assets and customer trust. Strategic recommendations include immediate SSL implementation, enhanced domain protection, and adoption of security best practices to elevate the security score and compliance posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

10 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

      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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  4. 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 ames.aero

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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
55
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
18
Average
23

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 · found on this site
  • 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

AMES operates in the aerospace engineering sector with a focus on certification and maintenance services, leveraging certifications like Part21J, Part21G, Part145, and CAMO. The company targets aerospace manufacturers, maintenance organizations, and operators needing regulatory compliance and engineering support. Its business model is service-oriented, emphasizing regulatory approvals and consulting. The website's content and structure support a medium-sized enterprise with a mature market presence. The lack of privacy and security policies may limit trust among privacy-conscious clients. The social media presence on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram suggests active marketing and engagement. The domain's registration details align with the company's Austrian base, supporting legitimacy. However, the absence of domain protection and upcoming expiry could disrupt operations if not addressed.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of HTTPS, exposing all traffic to interception and manipulation risks. No security headers or advanced DNS protections like DNSSEC or CAA are configured, increasing vulnerability to domain hijacking and man-in-the-middle attacks. The absence of HSTS and OCSP stapling further weakens SSL/TLS security if implemented. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are present, indicating low readiness for security incidents. The use of multiple third-party libraries without visible versioning or vulnerability management raises concerns about potential outdated components. Overall, the site is at high risk for security breaches and non-compliance with modern security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS site-wide immediately.
  2. Enable HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to prevent protocol downgrade attacks.
  3. Configure DNSSEC and CAA records to protect domain integrity and certificate issuance.
  4. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  5. Develop and publish an incident response policy and vulnerability disclosure program.
  6. Introduce a cookie consent mechanism and update privacy policy to reflect GDPR compliance.
  7. Regularly audit and update all third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  8. Renew domain registration promptly to avoid service disruption.
  9. Enhance website performance optimization to improve load times.
  10. Consider adding structured data (JSON-LD) for better SEO and business information clarity.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a traditional tech stack with jQuery, Bootstrap, and various UI/UX plugins like Owl Carousel and Fancybox. The HTML is well-structured with responsive design elements, supporting good mobile optimization. However, the site lacks HTTPS, which is a critical technical deficiency. Performance metrics are missing or zero, indicating no performance data or slow loading. No CMS detected, suggesting a custom or static site. Hosting provider is not explicitly identified but IP and DNS suggest a European hosting provider. Accessibility features are basic, with no ARIA roles or landmarks detected. SEO is basic with meta description and title tags but no Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data present. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but outdated and insecure.
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 ames.aero. 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 ames.aero.

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.