Skip to main content

Security report for cgant.com

CG Ant Design & Marketing · Technology · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 3 other checks.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

CG Ant Design & Marketing is a small creative agency specializing in brand identity, graphic design, motion design, web development, and marketing solutions. The company targets businesses seeking to enhance their brand image and online presence. Their website demonstrates a professional and modern design with clear navigation and comprehensive service descriptions. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and analytics integrations, offering good mobile responsiveness and SEO optimization. Security measures include HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA on forms, but lack some security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. The WHOIS data is missing, which raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy, though the website content and contact information appear credible. Overall, the site is well-constructed but would benefit from enhanced security practices and clearer domain registration transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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 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 cgant.com

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
20
Email security
85
DNS health
45
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
53
Average
48

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

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

The company positions itself as a reliable creative agency with 14 years of experience and a global customer base. Their business model focuses on providing comprehensive branding and marketing services, including video production, 3D design, and business analytics. The presence of testimonials and a portfolio indicates a client-focused approach and trust-building efforts. The use of Calendly for meetings and multiple contact channels suggests a professional client engagement strategy. However, the lack of visible company registration details and WHOIS data transparency could be a risk factor for potential clients. The company operates primarily in the technology and media sectors, targeting small to medium-sized businesses.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses Google reCAPTCHA to protect contact forms, which are positive security practices. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The site lacks a published security policy or incident response information, which could impact trust and compliance. Privacy compliance is partially addressed with a privacy policy but lacks cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be improved to meet higher standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations, improving user trust and legal compliance.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate commitment to security and facilitate vulnerability reporting.
  4. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS data issue to improve domain legitimacy and trustworthiness for visitors and clients.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities and maintain a secure environment.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CG Ant Design & Marketing
Description
Computer Graphic Ant team excels in crafting brand identity and design, as well as web solutions of any scale. They provide services including video & photo creation, branding and design, 3D and motion design, website development, business analytics, and online marketing.
Key services
Video & Photo creation, Branding and design, 3D and motion design, Website development, Business analytics, Online marketing
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, JavaScript, Google reCAPTCHA, Google Analytics, Yandex Metrika, Flickity, Plyr, SlimSelect, Font Awesome
Frameworks
WPBakery Page Builder
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA on contact forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Yandex Metrika
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Yandex Metrika
Marketing tools
Yandex Metrika, Calendly
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
good
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
good
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected
  2. Professional design with clear branding and consistent style
  3. Contact information is clearly provided with multiple channels
  4. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools
  5. Lack of visible security headers and cookie consent mechanism
  6. WHOIS data missing, raising questions about domain registration status
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the WPBakery Page Builder and a Bootstrap-based theme, indicating a modern and flexible infrastructure. It integrates several JavaScript libraries such as Flickity for carousels, Plyr for media playback, and SlimSelect for enhanced select inputs. Analytics tools include Google Analytics and Yandex Metrika, providing comprehensive visitor tracking. The site loads asynchronously optimized scripts and uses Google reCAPTCHA for spam protection on forms. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. There is room for improvement in accessibility and security header implementation. Hosting provider details are not disclosed, and domain registration data is missing, which may pose risks. Overall, the technical stack is solid but requires enhancements in security and privacy compliance.
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 cgant.com. 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 cgant.com.

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.