Skip to main content

Security report for cebra.info

Healthcare · Japan

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.cebra.info is a Japanese-language informational resource focused on educating visitors about the costs and types of phimosis surgery. It targets Japanese-speaking males seeking beginner-friendly explanations about surgical options, insurance applicability, and payment methods. The site operates primarily as an affiliate or referral platform linking to clinics such as MS Clinic, providing contact details and addresses for consultation. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Hemingway theme, with standard jQuery and Google Fonts integrations. It is mobile-optimized and presents a clear navigation structure. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled but lacks advanced security headers and privacy policies, indicating room for compliance improvements. WHOIS data is unavailable due to privacy protection, which is reasonable for this healthcare-related informational site but reduces transparency. Overall, the site is functional and informative but would benefit from enhanced privacy and security disclosures to improve trust and compliance.

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

8 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 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

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

Keep watching cebra.info

This scan found 27 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
59

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 cebra.info, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for cebra.info right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

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

The website occupies a niche in the Japanese healthcare information sector, specifically focusing on cosmetic and medical surgery education related to phimosis. Its business model appears to be content-driven with affiliate referrals to clinics, generating potential revenue through consultation bookings. The target audience is clearly defined as Japanese males considering or researching phimosis surgery. The site demonstrates consistent branding and good content quality but lacks explicit company or legal entity disclosures. Partnership with MS Clinic is evident, suggesting a referral ecosystem. Growth potential depends on expanding content, improving compliance, and possibly adding direct service offerings or broader healthcare topics.

Security posture

The site maintains a basic security posture with HTTPS enforced, ensuring encrypted communication. However, it lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are important to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No evidence of vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data was found. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not present, limiting the site's readiness for security incidents. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but requires enhancements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen site security.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Enhance contact information transparency by providing official company or site operator details.
  5. Regularly audit and update all third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Website provides detailed information about phimosis surgery costs, types, insurance applicability, and payment options targeted at beginners.
Key services
Information on phimosis surgery costs, Guidance on insurance and payment methods, Clinic referral links
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Fonts
Frameworks
Hemingway WordPress Theme
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is in Japanese and focused on phimosis surgery cost information.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating compliance gaps.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable, likely due to privacy protection.
  5. No explicit company or legal entity information is provided.
  6. Contact information includes clinic addresses and phone numbers but no direct company contacts.
  7. Site uses WordPress with a known theme and standard plugins.
  8. No security headers detected; HTTPS is enabled.
  9. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond WordPress basics.
  10. No social media links or emails found for direct company contact.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a stable and widely used CMS platform, WordPress, utilizing the Hemingway theme which supports responsive design and accessibility features. The tech stack includes jQuery and Google Fonts, standard for modern websites. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected, though no advanced performance optimization techniques were identified. SEO is supported through proper meta tags and structured navigation. However, the site lacks advanced security configurations and privacy compliance mechanisms. Hosting provider details are not disclosed, limiting infrastructure assessment. Overall, the technical implementation is solid for a small informational site but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security controls.
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 cebra.info. 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 cebra.info.

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.