Skip to main content

Security report for cliftoneyc.co.uk

Clifton Upon Teme Nursery · Education · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Email security, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Clifton Upon Teme Nursery & Forest School is a small, local childcare provider in Worcestershire, UK, specializing in outdoor, forest school-based early years education for children aged 3 months to 5 years. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image, emphasizing a nature-led, child-centered approach with flexible funding options and an Ofsted Good rating. The business targets families seeking nurturing outdoor childcare and early education in a rural setting. Technically, the website is built with modern HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, using Google Fonts for typography. It is mobile-optimized with good accessibility and SEO practices. However, no CMS or hosting provider details are evident, and performance is moderate. The site lacks advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are recommended for GDPR compliance. Security posture is moderate; HTTPS is implied but not confirmed, and the contact form includes a honeypot anti-spam field. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to a domain registration error, which reduces trustworthiness from a domain registration perspective but does not detract from the professional presentation and content quality of the website. Overall, the site is trustworthy and well-designed for its business purpose but would benefit from improved security headers, explicit cookie consent, and resolution of domain registration inconsistencies to enhance credibility and compliance.

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. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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

  3. 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 cliftoneyc.co.uk

This scan found 25 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. See sample alerts.

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
42
Security headers
30
Email security
75
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
60

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 nursery operates in the education sector with a focus on early years outdoor learning. Its competitive advantage lies in the forest school approach, Ofsted Good rating, and strong community trust evidenced by testimonials. The business model is service-based, offering childcare and education with flexible funding options. Revenue streams likely include funded childcare hours and private fees. The target customers are local families with young children. The website indicates a small-sized operation with no parent or subsidiary companies. The partnership ecosystem is minimal, limited to a Facebook social presence. Growth indicators are not explicit but the professional web presence and positive reviews suggest stable local demand.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate. The site uses HTTPS (assumed from URL), but lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS. The contact form includes basic anti-spam measures but no advanced protections. There is no published security policy or incident response information. GDPR compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not evident from the site. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small local business but could be improved to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply fully with GDPR cookie regulations.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Investigate and resolve the domain registration WHOIS error to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and dependencies to avoid vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Clifton Upon Teme Nursery
Description
Clifton Upon Teme Nursery & Forest School offers outdoor childcare from 3 months to school age in Worcestershire, focusing on a forest school approach with child-led, hands-on play in nature.
Key services
Nursery care for babies (3 months - 2 years), Toddler care (2 - 3 years), Pre-school education (3 - 5 years), Forest school outdoor learning, Flexible funding options including 15 and 30 hours funded childcare
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Fonts
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Contact form with honeypot anti-spam field
  • HTTPS implied by URL but not confirmed in data

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. No security headers detected in provided data; potential area for improvement.
  3. No cookie consent mechanism present despite GDPR relevance.
  4. Contact form uses basic anti-spam honeypot technique.
  5. WHOIS data is missing or invalid, which is unusual and reduces trust score.
  6. Strong branding and consistent design with clear business focus.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating privacy-conscious approach.
  8. Social media presence limited to Facebook only.
  9. No terms of service or explicit security policies published.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with clean, modern HTML and CSS, leveraging Google Fonts for typography. JavaScript is used for UI enhancements such as sticky navigation, scroll reveal animations, and a lightbox photo viewer. The site is responsive and accessible with keyboard navigation support. No CMS or backend technology is evident, suggesting a static or custom-built site. Performance is moderate, with no heavy external scripts or trackers detected. The lack of security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are technical debt areas. Hosting provider and SSL certificate details are not available from the data provided. Overall, the technical implementation is solid for a small business website but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy 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 cliftoneyc.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 cliftoneyc.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.