Skip to main content

Security report for bog.ge

საქართველოს ბანკი · Finance · Georgia

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Bank of Georgia operates as a leading financial institution in Georgia, providing a wide range of banking products and services to the Georgian population. The website reflects a professional and modern digital presence with a focus on user experience and security. The technical infrastructure leverages modern JavaScript frameworks, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and AppsFlyer for marketing and analytics, alongside security measures such as HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA to protect against automated abuse. The security posture is strong with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, although explicit security headers and privacy policies are not found in the provided HTML content. Overall, the website is trustworthy and well-positioned in its market segment, but could improve transparency around privacy and security policies.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

7 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 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

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

Keep watching bog.ge

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
77
Security headers
50
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
65

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention bog.ge, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
6,501
Employees
35
Customers
6,180
Third parties
286
Weak passwords
14%

Latest record dated 2026-02-22 · 54 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for bog.ge.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –pam.bog.ge2026-02-22
  • –pam.bog.ge2026-02-05
  • –accessflow.bog.ge2025-11-02
  • –request.bog.ge2025-11-01
  • –confluence.bog.ge2025-08-24

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Bank of Georgia is a well-established financial entity founded in 2002, serving the Georgian market with comprehensive banking and financial services. The company maintains a consistent brand and digital presence, targeting the general population of Georgia. The business model is centered on retail and corporate banking. The website's use of modern web technologies and analytics tools indicates a mature digital marketing strategy. The absence of explicit contact information and policy documents in the HTML content suggests these may be located on other pages or require further inspection. The company benefits from a strong market position and trust indicators such as HTTPS and official domain registration.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a solid security foundation with HTTPS enforced and the use of Google reCAPTCHA to mitigate bot traffic. The presence of a service worker indicates progressive web app capabilities, enhancing security and performance. However, the lack of visible security headers in the HTML content and absence of published security policies or incident response information represent areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Compliance with GDPR or similar regulations is not explicitly demonstrated, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found, which could enhance transparency and trust.

Recommendations

  1. Publish clear and accessible privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and disclose a formal security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  4. Provide explicit contact information including emails and phone numbers for customer and security incident reporting.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
საქართველოს ბანკი
Description
საქართველოს ბანკი ქმნის პროდუქტებსა და სერვისებს მთელი საქართველოს მოსახლეობისთვის
Key services
Banking products, Financial services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, AppsFlyer SDK, Service Worker, Web Components
Frameworks
Bog Design System
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection
  • Service Worker registered
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, AppsFlyer
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
AppsFlyer
Marketing tools
AppsFlyer
Transparency
basic

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. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the HTML content provided.
  3. Strong use of modern web technologies and security best practices like HTTPS and reCAPTCHA.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses explicitly found in the provided HTML content.
  5. Content is professional, relevant, and targeted to Georgian banking customers.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  7. No explicit security headers detected in the HTML content; likely configured at server level but not visible here.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern JavaScript-based tech stack with web components and a custom design system (Bog Design System). It integrates Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, and AppsFlyer for analytics and marketing. The site is mobile optimized and uses service workers for enhanced performance and offline capabilities. Fonts are preloaded for performance optimization. The site loads asynchronously and defers scripts to improve page load times. No CMS or hosting provider was explicitly detected from the HTML content. Overall, the technical implementation is modern and robust, with moderate performance and good SEO practices. Accessibility is basic and could be improved.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 64/100Medium34 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with bog.ge. 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 bog.ge.

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.