Skip to main content

Security report for chetwoods.com

Chetwoods Architects · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Chetwoods Architects is a medium-sized, award-winning architectural practice based in the United Kingdom with offices in London and Birmingham. The firm focuses on embedding creativity, sustainability, and technology in its architectural projects across various sectors including commercial, education, healthcare, residential, and industrial. Their market position is strong within the architectural industry, supported by professional certifications such as RIBA Chartered Practice and ARB registration. The website reflects a professional and modern digital presence built on Webflow, incorporating standard analytics and marketing tools with cookie consent mechanisms. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and ownership transparency. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS and consent management but lacks advanced security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is basic, with no explicit privacy or terms of service pages found. Contact information is limited to forms without direct emails or phone numbers. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from improved transparency and security documentation.

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

4 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. 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching chetwoods.com

This scan found 21 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
57
Security headers
30
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
73

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 operates in the real estate and architectural sector, providing a wide range of services from masterplanning to specialized sectors like data centres and life sciences. Their business model is service-oriented, targeting clients requiring architectural design and consultancy. The firm leverages digital marketing and analytics tools to engage visitors and collect leads via subscription forms. The lack of direct contact details and missing WHOIS data may impact client trust and due diligence processes. The firm appears to maintain a consistent brand and content strategy, emphasizing sustainability and innovation. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the website data. Growth indicators include a broad project portfolio and international reach. Strategic observations suggest the firm should enhance transparency and compliance documentation to strengthen market credibility.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and uses cookie consent management via Cookiebot, indicating awareness of privacy regulations. Tracking technologies include Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and Hotjar, with initial consent revocation for Facebook Pixel. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which is a gap in security readiness. The site does not expose sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries based on the provided data. Security best practices are partially implemented but could be improved with additional headers and published policies. The lack of WHOIS data and domain registration transparency is a concern for domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and transparency.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to enhance website security.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure domain legitimacy and build trust.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Legal name
Chetwoods Architects
Registration number
2203070PrivacyCookiesDesign
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Chetwoods Architects
Description
Chetwoods Architects is an award-winning architectural practice with offices in London, Birmingham and internationally. Their philosophy of Studio, Thrive and Works ensures creativity, sustainability and technology are embedded throughout their practice. They are a RIBA Chartered Practice and an ARB registered practice.
Key services
Architecture, Masterplanning, Industrial Intensification, Data Centres, Commercial, Education, Healthcare, Hotel & Leisure, Logistics, Life Sciences
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Webflow, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, Cookiebot, Swiper.js, Typekit Fonts
Frameworks
Webflow CMS
Platforms
Webflow Hosting
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent via Cookiebot
  • Use of Facebook Pixel with consent revoked initially

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with good content and navigation
  2. Uses modern web technologies and tracking tools with consent mechanisms
  3. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found, only contact forms
  4. WHOIS data missing, which is unusual for a professional business website
  5. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected
  6. Cookie consent implemented via Cookiebot
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
  8. Social media links present but URLs are placeholders (#)
  9. No security headers detected in provided data
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Webflow platform, utilizing modern web technologies including Google Fonts, Typekit, Swiper.js for UI components, and analytics/tracking tools such as Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, Hotjar, and Cookiebot for consent management. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, with some room for improvement in loading speed and accessibility. The technical infrastructure is modern but lacks advanced security configurations such as HTTP security headers. Hosting is provided by Webflow, which generally offers reliable and secure hosting services. Overall, the technical implementation supports a professional and functional website but could benefit from enhanced security and compliance features.
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 chetwoods.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 chetwoods.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.