Skip to main content

Security report for ats-group.co.uk

ATS Group LTD · Telecommunications · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ATS Group LTD is a UK-based company specializing in professional drone surveys, telecommunications inspections, chimney surveys, and bespoke prototyping services. Established in 1992 and incorporated in 1994, the company serves clients primarily across Swindon, Wiltshire, and the wider UK. Their market position is that of a leader in elevated photography and surveying services, offering a range of specialized solutions including bespoke builds and prototyping. The website infrastructure is built on standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, with Google Fonts integration. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and provides clear navigation and professional content. However, there is no evidence of advanced CMS or analytics tools, and no tracking or advertising scripts were detected, indicating a focus on straightforward information delivery. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are important for compliance and protection. No forms are present to collect sensitive data, reducing immediate risk exposure. The WHOIS lookup failed due to domain naming rules violations, which is unusual and may indicate domain registration irregularities. This discrepancy between the website's professional appearance and the lack of WHOIS data warrants further investigation. Overall, the website presents a professional business front with good technical implementation but has gaps in security best practices and privacy compliance. The domain registration concerns reduce trustworthiness and should be addressed to improve legitimacy and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

4 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.

    • 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

  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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching ats-group.co.uk

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
52
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
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

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

ATS Group LTD operates in the telecommunications and surveying sectors, targeting businesses requiring specialized aerial and structural surveys, as well as bespoke prototyping. Their competitive advantage lies in their long-standing market presence since 1992 and a broad service portfolio including drone and panoramic surveys, chimney inspections, and custom hardware builds. The business model is service-oriented, focusing on delivering technical surveying and prototyping solutions. The company appears to maintain a small business size with a localized UK focus. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the website data. Growth indicators include a diverse service offering and a professional online presence, though the lack of digital marketing and analytics tools suggests limited online customer acquisition strategies.

Security posture

The current security posture is moderate. The website uses HTTPS, which is mandatory for secure communications. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No forms or input fields reduce the risk of injection attacks, but the lack of a cookie consent mechanism and privacy compliance features is a gap. No incident response or security policy information is published, limiting transparency and preparedness. The WHOIS data anomaly is a significant concern, potentially indicating domain registration issues. Overall, the security maturity is basic with room for improvement in compliance and best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against web vulnerabilities.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and privacy compliance mechanisms to meet GDPR and UK data protection requirements.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Investigate and resolve the WHOIS domain registration anomaly to ensure domain legitimacy and trust.
  5. Consider integrating analytics and monitoring tools to better understand user behavior and improve website performance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
ATS Group LTD
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ATS Group LTD
Description
Market leaders in professional Drone Surveys, Telecoms, Chimney inspections, and Bespoke Prototyping across the UK. Established in 1992 and incorporated in 1994, serving clients across Swindon, Wiltshire and the wider UK.
Key services
Drone Surveys, Telecoms Surveys, Panoramic Surveys, Chimney Surveys, Bespoke Builds, Prototyping
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts (Inter)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS assumed (URL uses https)
  • No forms detected to collect sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

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 forms detected on the homepage or main content
  3. Contact information is clearly presented in the footer
  4. No social media links found
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected
  6. No cookie consent banner or mechanism present
  7. Privacy policy and terms of service pages are linked in the footer
  8. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules error, which is unusual and warrants further investigation
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard web technologies including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, with Google Fonts for typography. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good navigation clarity. No CMS or advanced frameworks were detected, indicating a likely custom or static site. Performance is moderate with preloading of fonts and images to improve load times. No third-party analytics or advertising scripts were found, suggesting minimal tracking. The lack of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and privacy compliance. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not discernible from the provided data.
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 ats-group.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 ats-group.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.