Skip to main content

Security report for bigpartnership.co.uk

BIG Partnership · Other · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and Security headers.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

BIG Partnership is an established, independent integrated communications agency based in the UK, offering a broad range of services including PR, marketing, digital, creative, social media, and public affairs. With over 25 years of experience, the company positions itself as a strategic partner for businesses seeking to enhance brand visibility and impact. The website reflects a professional and modern digital presence, leveraging WordPress CMS, HubSpot marketing and analytics tools, and Google Tag Manager for tracking and consent management. Multimedia content such as videos and client logos enhance engagement and credibility. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, though explicit security policies and incident response information are not published. WHOIS data for the domain is unavailable due to an invalid query on the 'www' subdomain, which slightly reduces trust from a domain registration perspective. Overall, the website is well-designed, content-rich, and demonstrates good technical and marketing maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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. 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

  2. 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';…

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

Keep watching bigpartnership.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
37
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
63

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 agency targets businesses across sectors such as property and construction, leisure and tourism, and financial and professional services. Its business model focuses on integrated communications solutions combining PR, digital marketing, creative design, and public affairs. The presence of notable client logos and active social media channels indicates a strong market position and partnership ecosystem. The company likely generates revenue through service contracts and retains clients by delivering measurable campaign results. The website's content and structure suggest a medium-sized enterprise with a focus on quality and client engagement.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and integrates cookie consent via Cookiebot, indicating attention to user privacy and security compliance. Use of Google Tag Manager and HubSpot analytics is managed with consent mechanisms. However, the absence of published privacy policies, terms of service, security policies, and incident response contacts represents a compliance gap. No security headers were detected in the provided data, and no vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files are present. The security posture is moderate, with room for improvement in transparency and formal security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to enhance legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and publicly disclose a security policy and incident response procedures including contact channels for security issues.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve protection against common web attacks.
  4. Verify and correct WHOIS queries to obtain accurate domain registration data; consider publishing domain registration info for transparency.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and integrations to minimize risk from external dependencies.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
BIG Partnership
Description
An ambitious, independent integrated communications agency with 25+ yrs of experience across PR, marketing, digital, creative, social, & public affairs.
Key services
Public Relations, Digital PR, SEO, Paid Search, Social Media, Website Design & Development, Brand & Visual Identity, Brand Strategy & Messaging, CRO, Creative & Design
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, HubSpot forms and analytics, Google Tag Manager, Vimeo embed, Swiper.js
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google Tag Manager with consent management
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
HubSpot Analytics
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia.
  2. No explicit privacy or terms of service pages found in provided content.
  3. Cookie consent is implemented via Cookiebot.
  4. Contact information is primarily via embedded HubSpot contact form; no explicit emails or phone numbers found.
  5. Social media links present but URLs are placeholders (#) except in structured data.
  6. WHOIS query was performed on 'www.bigpartnership.co.uk' which is invalid; no registrar or registration data available.
  7. Website uses modern technologies and SEO best practices.
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  9. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 7.0 with Yoast SEO plugin for search optimization. It uses HubSpot for forms, analytics, and marketing automation, and Google Tag Manager for tag management. Multimedia content includes embedded Vimeo videos and client logo carousels powered by Swiper.js. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with some optimization possible. The use of multiple external domains for analytics and consent management is well integrated but requires ongoing monitoring for privacy compliance. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and engaging user experience.
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 bigpartnership.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 bigpartnership.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.