Skip to main content

Security report for c-tec.co.uk

C-TEC · Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 12 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

27/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website c-tec.co.uk serves primarily as a minimal landing page that redirects visitors to the main corporate website c-tec.com. It lacks substantive content about the business, its services, or contact information. The site is built on WordPress using the Divi theme and includes jQuery libraries. However, it suffers from significant security and compliance shortcomings, including the absence of an SSL certificate, no privacy or cookie policies, and no visible contact or security incident response information. Performance is slow, and SEO and accessibility features are minimal. Overall, the site appears to be a placeholder rather than a fully developed business portal. From a technical perspective, the site is hosted on Google Cloud infrastructure and uses standard WordPress technologies. The lack of HTTPS and security headers exposes it to potential risks and undermines user trust. No analytics or tracking tools are detected, indicating minimal user data collection. The DNS configuration is standard but lacks advanced security features like DNSSEC or DMARC. Security posture is weak due to missing HTTPS, lack of security headers, and no visible security or incident response policies. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present to guide security researchers. The domain registration data is consistent with the UK presence and business identity, supporting legitimacy, but the website itself lacks professionalism and trust signals. Strategically, the site should prioritize implementing HTTPS, adding comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, and providing clear contact and security incident response information. Improving site performance, SEO, and accessibility would also enhance user experience and trust. These steps are critical to align the website with modern security and compliance standards and to support the business's digital credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
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

12 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. 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

  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.

    • 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL 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

  4. 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

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

Keep watching c-tec.co.uk

This scan found 20 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
0
Security headers
35
Email security
50
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
0
Average
27

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

C-TEC appears to operate primarily through its main domain c-tec.com, with c-tec.co.uk serving as a secondary or redirect domain. The minimal content on this site suggests it is not the primary customer engagement platform. The business likely targets UK-based customers given the .co.uk domain and DNS configuration. The lack of detailed business information, services, or contact details on this site limits insights into market positioning or business model. No evidence of partnerships, subsidiaries, or certifications is found on this domain. The use of WordPress and Divi theme indicates a standard web presence approach, possibly managed in-house or by a small team. The absence of analytics or marketing tools suggests limited digital marketing activity on this domain. Overall, the business intelligence points to a small-scale or focused operation with the main digital presence elsewhere.

Security posture

The security posture of c-tec.co.uk is currently weak. The site lacks a valid SSL certificate, serving content over HTTP only, which exposes visitors to interception risks and undermines trust. No security headers such as HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, or X-Frame-Options are present, increasing vulnerability to common web attacks. DNS records do not include DNSSEC or DMARC, limiting email security and domain integrity. No privacy or cookie policies are published, indicating non-compliance with GDPR and related privacy regulations. The absence of incident response contact channels or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms further reduces security maturity. While no active vulnerabilities or malware are detected, the foundational security controls are missing. Immediate remediation is recommended to implement HTTPS, security headers, and compliance policies to reduce risk and improve trustworthiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the site.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with GDPR compliance.
  3. Add security headers including HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information including security incident response channels.
  5. Improve site performance and SEO by optimizing resources and metadata.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using the Divi theme and includes jQuery libraries. Hosting is on Google Cloud infrastructure with the IP address 35.214.94.183. The site has a slow load time of approximately 7.34 seconds despite a small page size and limited resources, indicating potential server or configuration inefficiencies. No modern TLS protocols or cipher suites are supported due to the absence of SSL. The site lacks advanced DNS security features such as DNSSEC and CAA records. No analytics or marketing scripts are detected, suggesting minimal tracking or user data collection. The HTML content is valid but minimal, with no forms or interactive elements. Overall, the technical implementation is basic and requires modernization and security enhancements to meet current standards.
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 c-tec.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 c-tec.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.