Skip to main content

Security report for cocodelivery.com

Coco Robotics · Transportation · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Coco Robotics presents itself as a company focused on developing autonomous delivery vehicles designed for urban environments. The website content highlights their vision of a future with affordable, reliable, clean, quiet, and fast autonomous delivery solutions. The company appears to be a small player innovating in the transportation sector with a technology-driven business model. The website is built using Framer, indicating a modern but simple technical infrastructure. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and ownership transparency. Security posture is weak due to lack of HTTPS verification, security headers, and privacy policies. Overall, while the business concept is promising, the digital maturity and security compliance require significant improvement to build trust and ensure regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

5 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. 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

  3. 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 cocodelivery.com

This scan found 24 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
52
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
69

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 targets urban delivery markets with autonomous vehicle technology, positioning itself as an innovator in transportation technology. The business model likely involves manufacturing and deploying autonomous delivery robots for last-mile logistics. The website lacks detailed business information such as founding year, company size, or geographic location, limiting deeper market analysis. No partnerships or certifications are disclosed, which could be areas for growth. The absence of contact information and privacy policies may hinder customer trust and regulatory compliance. The company should focus on enhancing transparency and establishing a stronger digital presence to support business growth.

Security posture

The website currently exhibits a low security maturity level. There is no evidence of HTTPS enforcement or security headers, which are critical for protecting user data and preventing common web attacks. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating potential GDPR and other compliance gaps. The lack of incident response contacts or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests limited preparedness for security incidents. No analytics or tracking scripts were detected, which reduces privacy risks but also limits business intelligence. To improve, the company should implement HTTPS, add security headers, publish privacy and cookie policies, and establish clear incident response procedures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Provide clear and accessible contact information including support and security incident contacts.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Coco Robotics
Description
We believe the future is autonomous – and radically better. Affordable, reliable, clean, quiet, and fast. So we’ve built a new type of autonomous delivery vehicle, made for any city.
Key services
Autonomous delivery vehicle manufacturing, Urban delivery solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. No WHOIS registration data available, which is unusual for an active commercial website.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected on the site.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the content.
  5. Website uses Framer as CMS and hosting platform.
  6. No security headers or explicit security policies detected.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Content is focused on autonomous delivery vehicles and robotics technology.
  9. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Framer platform, which provides a modern and visually appealing design framework. The site is moderately optimized for mobile devices and has a good design quality. However, technical implementation lacks advanced features such as accessibility enhancements and SEO optimization. No third-party analytics or marketing tools are detected, which simplifies privacy but limits data-driven insights. The absence of security headers and HTTPS verification are significant technical risks. Performance appears moderate but could benefit from optimization. Overall, the technical infrastructure is basic and requires enhancements to meet professional and security 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 cocodelivery.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 cocodelivery.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.