Skip to main content

Security report for bidding-audit.cz

Bidding Fox technologies, s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Bidding Audit is a Czech-based technology company specializing in providing free bidding audit services to e-commerce businesses using price comparison platforms such as Heureka and Zboží. The company operates under Bidding Fox technologies, s.r.o., a small-sized entity founded in 2021 and part of the Profitak group. Their key offerings include detailed bidding audit reports and automated bidding tools aimed at improving product offer competitiveness and advertising efficiency. The website is professionally designed with good content relevance and clear navigation, targeting Czech and Slovak markets. Technically, the site uses modern React-based SPA architecture with integrated analytics and cookie consent mechanisms, ensuring GDPR compliance. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks explicit security policies or incident response disclosures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 100 · Low
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 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. 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.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

  4. 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 bidding-audit.cz

This scan found 19 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
25
Email security
65
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
85
Average
72

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 positions itself as a niche player in the bidding audit and automation market for e-commerce, leveraging partnerships with platforms like Mergado and Bidding Fox. Their business model revolves around SaaS tools and consulting services that help online retailers optimize their bidding strategies on price comparison sites. Customer testimonials and integration with known platforms enhance credibility. The target audience includes small to medium e-commerce businesses in the Czech and Slovak Republics. The company benefits from being part of the Profitak group, which may provide additional resources and market reach. Growth potential lies in expanding automated bidding solutions and deepening integrations with e-commerce ecosystems.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, cookie consent, and GDPR compliance. However, it lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms, which are important for transparency and trust. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. The use of third-party analytics and tag management is standard but should be monitored for privacy compliance. Recommendations include adding security headers, publishing a security policy, and establishing a formal incident response channel to enhance security maturity and customer trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Add HTTP security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), Strict-Transport-Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to improve protection against common web attacks.
  3. Create and maintain a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  5. Continue monitoring third-party scripts and analytics for privacy compliance and minimize user tracking where possible.

Contact details published on the site

Legal name
Bidding Fox technologies, s.r.o.
Registration number
04677200
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bidding Fox technologies, s.r.o.
Description
Bidding Audit offers a free audit service to check the status of bidding product offers to improve their success and competitiveness on price comparison platforms.
Key services
Bidding audit reports, Automated bidding tool (Bidding Fox), Consulting and support for bidding optimization
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, CookieHub, SVG graphics, Webpack
Frameworks
React
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
CookieHub
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is in Czech language targeting Czech and Slovak e-commerce businesses.
  3. Strong GDPR and cookie compliance with visible consent mechanism.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on main page; contact via form or linked contact page.
  5. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  6. Business is a small technology company focused on bidding audit and automation.
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information published.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Good user experience and professional design.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built as a React single-page application using modern JavaScript tooling including Webpack. It integrates Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking, alongside CookieHub for cookie consent management. The site uses SVG graphics for visual elements and is optimized for mobile devices with responsive design. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and preconnect hints to external resources. No CMS was detected, indicating a custom-built solution. Hosting provider details are not explicitly available. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security headers and accessibility improvements.
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 bidding-audit.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 bidding-audit.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.