Skip to main content

Security report for boder-partner.de

Reinhard Boder · Other · Germany

Partial score · DNS & email only

34/100

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

The website for boder-partner.de represents a small, locally focused business led by Managing Director Reinhard Boder, based in Schwabhausen, Germany. The site provides basic contact information but lacks detailed business descriptions or service listings, indicating a modest online presence. The technical infrastructure is minimal and outdated, with no modern CMS or frameworks detected, and the site is hosted on kundenserver.de. Critically, the website lacks HTTPS support and a valid SSL certificate, exposing visitors to security risks and undermining trust. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating non-compliance with GDPR and related privacy regulations. Overall, the site is functional but basic, with significant room for improvement in security, compliance, and user experience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

Checks completed
5of 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

3 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • High

      No Name Servers Found

      Unable to find name servers for domain

      What to do: Configure proper name servers for the domain

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching boder-partner.de

This scan found 7 issues across 4 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
0
Email security
50
DNS health
65
Network security
20
Average
34

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 business appears to be a small professional or consulting service with direct contact channels but limited digital marketing or online engagement. The absence of social media links, analytics, or marketing tools suggests a low digital maturity level. The domain has been registered since at least 2012, consistent with a stable but small-scale operation. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident. The business model is likely direct client engagement without e-commerce or online transactions. Growth potential may be limited by the minimal online presence and lack of modern digital tools.

Security posture

The security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and SSL certificates, lack of security headers, and no evidence of incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. The site does not implement HSTS, OCSP stapling, or session resumption, and no security policies are published. These deficiencies expose the business and its visitors to potential interception and attacks. Compliance with GDPR is questionable given the lack of privacy and cookie policies. Immediate remediation is recommended to secure communications and improve trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the site.
  2. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to harden the site against common attacks.
  4. Consider adding an incident response contact and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve security transparency.
  5. Modernize the website infrastructure with updated technologies and improve mobile and accessibility features to enhance user experience.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website runs on an Apache server with no modern CMS or frameworks detected. The HTML is basic and generated by NetObjects Fusion 10, indicating legacy technology usage. Performance metrics are unavailable but inferred to be slow due to lack of optimization and chunked transfer encoding without caching headers. The site is not mobile optimized and lacks accessibility features. DNS records show hosting on kundenserver.de with no DNSSEC or CAA records, which could be improved for security. Overall, the technical stack is outdated and requires modernization to meet current web standards and security best practices.
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 boder-partner.de. 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 boder-partner.de.

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.