Skip to main content

Security report for bacthera.com

Bacthera AG in Liquidation · Healthcare · Switzerland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Bacthera AG in Liquidation is a biotech joint venture between Novonesis and Lonza with offices in Switzerland, Denmark, and Spain. The company appears to be in the process of liquidation, as indicated by the website content. The business focuses on biotechnological manufacturing services, targeting industry stakeholders and partners. The website is built on WordPress and uses Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking visitor data. The technical infrastructure is moderate with basic mobile optimization and SEO features. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled but lacks advanced security headers and explicit incident response or security policies. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and trustworthiness. Privacy and cookie policies exist but lack a consent mechanism, impacting GDPR compliance. Overall, the website provides minimal content and basic business information with moderate trust indicators.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

5 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 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching bacthera.com

This scan found 24 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
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

The company operates in the healthcare and manufacturing sectors as a small joint venture. Its market position is niche and currently weakened due to liquidation status. The business model revolves around biotech manufacturing services, leveraging partnerships with Novonesis and Lonza. Contact information and company registration details are provided, enhancing credibility. However, the lack of WHOIS data and limited online presence beyond LinkedIn reduces transparency. The website's basic content and minimal marketing tools suggest limited digital maturity. There are no indications of certifications or security frameworks, and no vulnerability disclosure program is evident. Strategic partnerships and subsidiaries are not detailed, limiting insight into the broader ecosystem.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, which is a fundamental security measure. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. There is no visible incident response or security policy documentation, and no dedicated contact channels for security incidents. The forms present are minimal and require basic user information without advanced security controls. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager introduces moderate user tracking, but privacy compliance is basic with no explicit cookie consent mechanism. The missing WHOIS data is a significant red flag for domain legitimacy and overall trust. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance web security.
  2. Establish a clear cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and improve user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page including contact channels for security issues.
  4. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS registration data to improve domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Enhance website content quality and navigation to improve user experience and business credibility.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Bacthera AG in Liquidation
Registration number
CVR no. 40697322
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bacthera AG in Liquidation
Description
Bacthera is a joint venture between Novonesis and Lonza with offices in Switzerland, Denmark and Spain. The company is currently in liquidation.
Key services
Biotechnological manufacturing services
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, jQuery (implied by libs.js), Custom JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF
  2. WHOIS data is missing or domain not found in registry
  3. Company is in liquidation status
  4. Basic privacy and cookie policy present but no explicit consent mechanism
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages found
  6. Contact information includes email and physical addresses but no phone numbers
  7. Website uses Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking
  8. No security headers detected in provided data
  9. Website built on WordPress CMS
  10. Design and content quality are basic with minimal content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with custom theme assets and uses Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for visitor tracking. JavaScript libraries are loaded from the site itself and Google domains. The site is mobile responsive with moderate performance but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No hosting provider information was detected. The absence of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms indicates technical debt in security and privacy compliance. The domain WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual and suggests potential registration or privacy issues. Overall, the technical infrastructure is basic and could benefit from modernization and enhanced security controls.
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 bacthera.com. 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 bacthera.com.

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.