Skip to main content

Security report for bitcentral.com

Bitcentral · Media · N/a

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

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Bitcentral is a media software solutions provider specializing in tools that enable media organizations to efficiently produce, distribute, and stream content. The company has an established market presence with a domain registered since 1997, indicating long-term operation. Their website reflects a professional digital presence built on WordPress, leveraging modern analytics and marketing technologies such as Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and HubSpot. The technical infrastructure is hosted on AWS DNS services, supporting a moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and domain registrar locks in place; however, there is room for improvement in DNS security and security headers. Privacy compliance is basic, with a cookie consent mechanism present but lacking a visible privacy policy or terms of service. Contact information is not explicitly provided in the analyzed content, which may impact user trust and compliance. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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 bitcentral.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
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
70

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

Bitcentral operates in the media sector, targeting media organizations requiring software solutions for content production and distribution. Their business model centers on providing software tools and services, positioning themselves as an established player with a medium-sized footprint. The company leverages partnerships with major analytics and advertising platforms to support marketing efforts. The lack of explicit contact and compliance documentation suggests potential areas for operational improvement. The domain's longevity and consistent registration details support a credible business identity. No evidence of subsidiaries or parent companies was found, indicating an independent operation.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and registrar-level domain locks, which are positive security indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which limits transparency and preparedness perception. The use of multiple third-party tracking and marketing scripts increases the attack surface and privacy risks. No exposed sensitive data or known vulnerabilities were detected in the analyzed content. The security score is moderate, with recommendations to enhance DNS security, implement security headers, and publish security policies to improve trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident contacts to enhance transparency and incident response readiness.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting and improve security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Bitcentral
Description
We provide media software solutions and tools that help media organizations to produce, distribute, and stream their stories efficiently and effortlessly.
Key services
Media software solutions, Content production tools, Distribution and streaming tools
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, HubSpot scripts, AWS DNS
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Domain status includes clientDeleteProhibited and other EPP locks

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, HubSpot Analytics, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Facebook Ads, Twitter Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, HubSpot Analytics, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
HubSpot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage or in metadata
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML content
  5. Use of multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  7. WHOIS data shows domain is stable and not privacy protected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, utilizing JavaScript libraries and third-party marketing and analytics tools such as HubSpot, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and LinkedIn Insight Tag. Hosting is supported by AWS DNS infrastructure, indicating a reliable backend. The site shows good mobile responsiveness and basic accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with some potential for optimization. The absence of DNSSEC and security headers indicates technical debt in security best practices. The site uses canonical and Open Graph metadata effectively for SEO and social sharing. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance tuning.
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 bitcentral.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 bitcentral.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.