Skip to main content

Security report for ashallendesign.co.uk

Ash Allen Design · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ash Allen Design is a small freelance web design and Laravel development business based in Preston, UK. The company offers affordable, high-quality website design and development services tailored to small local businesses and developers. The website presents a professional image with comprehensive service descriptions, client testimonials, and a portfolio, positioning itself as a trusted local provider with a strong digital presence including authored books and free resources. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies such as Bootstrap, Livewire, and Font Awesome, hosted likely on DigitalOcean, with moderate performance and excellent mobile optimization. However, the security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which is a critical issue. Privacy compliance is addressed with a cookie consent mechanism and a clear privacy policy. Overall, the site is professional and credible but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
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

3 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 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

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

Keep watching ashallendesign.co.uk

This scan found 16 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
97
Security headers
70
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
43
Average
68

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 ashallendesign.co.uk, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for ashallendesign.co.uk right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 operates as a freelance service provider focusing on web design and Laravel development, targeting small businesses in Preston and developers seeking digital products. It leverages content marketing through blogs and free downloadable assets, and maintains partnerships with DigitalOcean and uses Fathom Analytics for privacy-conscious tracking. The company demonstrates strong branding consistency and trust signals such as client testimonials and social media engagement. Revenue streams likely include service fees for web design and development, book sales, and sponsorships. The business model is direct-to-client freelance services with an emphasis on quality and affordability. The partnership ecosystem includes hosting and analytics providers, with no detected subsidiaries or parent companies.

Security posture

The website's security maturity is low due to the lack of HTTPS and valid SSL certificates, exposing visitors to potential data interception risks. While SPF records are correctly configured for email, DNSSEC and CAA records are absent, reducing DNS security. The site employs HSTS but without a valid certificate, limiting its effectiveness. No advanced security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosures are present, indicating limited formal security governance. Forms are present but no explicit anti-CSRF or input validation details are visible. The absence of OCSP stapling and session resumption reduces TLS performance and security. Overall, the site requires immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of security policies to meet compliance and protect user data.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable outdated/insecure protocols.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve TLS performance and security.
  4. Add DNSSEC and CAA DNS records to strengthen domain name system security.
  5. Publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using a modern technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, Font Awesome for icons, Livewire and Wire Elements Pro for reactive components, and Fathom Analytics for privacy-focused tracking. Hosting is likely provided by DigitalOcean, inferred from referral badges. The site has moderate performance with a load time of approximately 4 seconds and 54 resources, which is acceptable but could be optimized. Mobile optimization is excellent with responsive images and layouts. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph, Twitter cards, and JSON-LD structured data describing the business. Accessibility features are present but not deeply analyzed. The main technical risk is the lack of HTTPS, which impacts security and SEO rankings. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but requires security upgrades.
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 ashallendesign.co.uk. 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 ashallendesign.co.uk.

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.