Skip to main content

Security report for bestbrand.cz

BestBrand · Other · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

BestBrand is a small marketing studio based in the Czech Republic focused on creating successful brand identities. The website content is minimal, primarily presenting the company as a comprehensive marketing studio with partner links to other media and design studios. The technical infrastructure is based on ASP.NET Web Forms, indicating a legacy or basic web platform with moderate performance and basic mobile optimization. Security posture is weak due to lack of HTTPS confirmation, absence of security headers, and missing privacy and cookie policies. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy and trustworthiness. Overall, the website lacks critical compliance and security features, limiting its professional credibility and increasing risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

8 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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

    • 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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

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

Keep watching bestbrand.cz

This scan found 21 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. See sample alerts.

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
77
Security headers
80
Email security
40
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
25
Average
53

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 marketing services sector targeting general business clients seeking branding and marketing solutions. The business model appears service-oriented with partnerships indicated by linked domains. There is no evidence of extensive digital marketing or analytics integration, suggesting a low digital maturity level. The absence of detailed business information, contact data, or certifications limits transparency and trust. The partnership ecosystem includes at least two related marketing studios, which may enhance service offerings. Growth indicators and revenue streams are not discernible from the website content.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low. The website lacks visible HTTPS enforcement confirmation and security headers, which are fundamental for protecting user data and preventing common web attacks. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. There is no evidence of incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. The absence of WHOIS data further complicates trust assessment. These gaps expose the business to potential reputational and legal risks. The security culture appears minimal, with no indicators of proactive security management.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure data transmission.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and enhance user trust.
  3. Deploy standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish clear contact information including security incident response contacts to improve transparency.
  5. Regularly review and update WHOIS registration details to ensure domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
BestBrand
Description
Tvoříme úspěšné identity, jsme komplexní marketingové studio.
Key services
branding, marketing studio services
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET Web Forms
Frameworks
ASP.NET
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is minimalistic with limited content and no visible contact or policy pages.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No security headers or HTTPS status information available.
  4. WHOIS data is missing, indicating possible domain registration issues or privacy protection.
  5. External links to partner marketing studios are present.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  7. No social media or contact emails found on the page.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses ASP.NET Web Forms technology, which may indicate legacy infrastructure. The HTML content is minimal and lacks modern SEO and accessibility features. There is no evidence of CMS usage or advanced JavaScript frameworks. Performance is moderate but could be improved with modern optimization techniques. Mobile optimization is basic, and accessibility features are minimal. The absence of analytics and tracking scripts suggests limited digital marketing integration. Technical debt is likely present due to outdated technology stack and minimal content management capabilities.
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 bestbrand.cz. 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 bestbrand.cz.

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.