Skip to main content

Security report for bva.hu

Befektető-védelmi Alap · Finance · Hungary

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Befektető-védelmi Alap operates as Hungary's Investor Protection Fund, providing compensation and protection services to investors within the Hungarian financial market. The website serves as an official informational portal detailing eligibility, compensation processes, regulatory framework, and organizational structure. The target audience primarily includes investors and financial market participants in Hungary. The business model is government-backed, focusing on investor protection and regulatory compliance. The site content is well-structured, professionally presented, and consistent with the organization's official role. Technically, the website is built on WordPress CMS using the Manduca theme, incorporating modern web technologies such as jQuery and MediaElement.js for multimedia content. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices, although some multimedia content has playback issues. Performance is moderate, with no significant technical deficiencies detected. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and implements a cookie consent mechanism, indicating attention to privacy compliance. However, explicit security headers are missing, and there is no publicly available security policy or incident response information. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The WHOIS data confirms the domain's legitimacy and long-standing presence since 2000, consistent with a government or official entity. Overall, the website presents a trustworthy and professional front for the Investor Protection Fund, with minor recommendations to enhance security posture and transparency. The risk level is low, with no critical issues identified.

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. Network security

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

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • 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

  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 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';…

  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 bva.hu

This scan found 23 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
83
Average
55
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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 Investor Protection Fund holds a key position in Hungary's financial regulatory ecosystem, providing essential compensation services to investors. Its government-backed status and long domain history suggest stability and trustworthiness. The business model revolves around regulatory compliance and investor protection, with revenue likely sourced from member contributions or government funding. The website targets investors and financial institutions, offering detailed guidance on compensation eligibility and procedures. The absence of commercial advertising or affiliate programs aligns with its public service mandate. Strategic partnerships or subsidiaries are not evident, indicating a focused operational scope. Growth indicators are subtle, with emphasis on regulatory updates and public communication.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and a cookie consent banner indicating GDPR awareness. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces the overall security robustness. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could hinder timely reporting and mitigation of security issues. The lack of exposed sensitive data and no detected vulnerable libraries are positive indicators. The site would benefit from publishing explicit security policies and implementing recommended HTTP security headers to enhance protection against common web threats.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and security researchers.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Fix multimedia playback issues to improve user experience and accessibility.
  5. Enhance transparency by adding terms of service and more detailed contact information including verified company emails and phone numbers.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Befektető-védelmi Alap
Description
Investor Protection Fund providing compensation and protection services to investors in Hungary.
Key services
Investor compensation, Information on eligibility and filing claims, Regulatory information, Publications and communications
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, MediaElement.js, Google Fonts
Frameworks
Manduca theme
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

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 focused on investor protection and compensation in Hungary.
  3. No explicit security policies or incident response information publicly available.
  4. Cookie consent is implemented with a visible banner.
  5. No terms of service page found.
  6. No analytics or advertising scripts detected.
  7. Website uses WordPress CMS with custom Manduca theme.
  8. No social media links or company emails explicitly found in the HTML content.
  9. Contact information is primarily via contact page and forms.
  10. Video content is present but with playback error due to format or source issues.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress platform using the Manduca theme, leveraging jQuery and MediaElement.js for interactive and multimedia features. The use of Google Fonts ensures consistent typography. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO metadata such as viewport settings and alternate hreflang links for language versions. Performance is moderate, with no major blocking scripts detected. However, the video content has playback errors likely due to format or source issues. No advanced hosting or CDN information was detected. The site lacks modern security headers which could be addressed to reduce technical risks.
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 bva.hu. 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 bva.hu.

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.