Skip to main content

Security report for atlas-washrooms.co.uk

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.atlas-washrooms.co.uk currently serves a security verification page employing Google reCAPTCHA v3, effectively blocking access to any substantive content. This indicates the site is protected by a security mechanism, likely to prevent automated access or abuse. Due to this, no business-related content, contact information, or policies are accessible for analysis. The WHOIS lookup for the domain failed with an error from Nominet UK citing domain naming rules violations, suggesting the domain may be improperly registered or invalid. This raises significant concerns about the legitimacy and operational status of the website. From a technical perspective, the site uses Bootstrap 5.3.3 for styling and Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation, but no other frameworks or CMS are detectable. The lack of visible security headers, privacy policies, or contact details further limits the assessment of the site's security posture and compliance. The absence of HTTPS information in the provided data is a critical gap. Security-wise, the presence of reCAPTCHA is a positive control against automated abuse, but the lack of other security best practices and the blocked content status reduce confidence in the site's overall security maturity. The domain's WHOIS failure and lack of registrant data further diminish trust. Overall, the site is currently inaccessible beyond a security challenge, with no publicly available business or compliance information. This results in a low trust and legitimacy score, and the site should be monitored or further investigated for proper registration and operational status.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

7 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 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"

    • 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 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

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

Keep watching atlas-washrooms.co.uk

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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
59

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

Due to the security verification page blocking access, no direct business intelligence data such as company name, market position, or services can be extracted. The domain name suggests a business related to washrooms or sanitation services, but no supporting content is available. The lack of contact information, policies, or certifications indicates minimal digital maturity and limited transparency. No partnerships or related domains are identified. The business model, revenue streams, and customer segments remain unknown.

Security posture

The security posture is minimal with only Google reCAPTCHA v3 implemented to prevent automated access. No other security headers or HTTPS details are visible. The domain WHOIS lookup failure is a significant red flag, indicating potential registration issues. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The site lacks privacy and cookie policies, which are critical for GDPR compliance. Overall, the security maturity is low, with critical gaps in transparency and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Verify and correct domain registration to comply with Nominet UK rules to ensure legitimacy.
  2. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and configure security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, etc.).
  3. Publish clear privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Provide accessible contact information and business details to enhance credibility.
  5. Conduct a comprehensive security audit to identify and remediate vulnerabilities beyond bot protection.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page is a security verification challenge with Google reCAPTCHA v3, minimal content, indicating access is blocked or restricted. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 5.3.3, Google reCAPTCHA v3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot verification

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is a security verification page with Google reCAPTCHA v3.
  2. No business content or contact information is accessible.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules violation.
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  5. No visible security headers or HTTPS information provided.
  6. External resources are limited to CDN and Google reCAPTCHA domains.
  7. Website is effectively blocked by a security mechanism preventing content access.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Bootstrap 5.3.3 for styling and integrates Google reCAPTCHA v3 for bot mitigation. No CMS or additional frameworks are detected. The page content is minimal, serving only a security verification challenge with a form that submits a reCAPTCHA token. External resources are loaded from trusted CDNs and Google domains. Performance is likely moderate due to minimal content but cannot be fully assessed. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic due to the limited page structure. SEO optimization is poor as no meta description or keywords are present beyond the title. The lack of visible HTTPS and security headers is a technical risk.
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 atlas-washrooms.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 atlas-washrooms.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.