Skip to main content

Security report for comperiaraty.pl

Other · Poland

Partial score · DNS & email only

75/100

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

The website comperiaraty.pl appears to be a small business site based in Poland, likely focused on financial services such as loans or installment plans, as suggested by the domain name and typical keywords. The site is built on WordPress using the Astra theme and Elementor page builder, indicating a moderate level of technical maturity. The presence of Cookiebot and Google Tag Manager scripts shows some awareness of privacy and marketing needs, although critical legal pages like privacy policy and terms of service are missing. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but lacks advanced security headers and incident response information. Overall, the site is functional but lacks comprehensive compliance and security maturity, which could impact user trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
6of 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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

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

Keep watching comperiaraty.pl

This scan found 14 issues across 4 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
67
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
83
After the cap
75

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 business operates in the financial sector in Poland, targeting consumers interested in loans or installment payment options. The business model likely revolves around lead generation or financial product comparison. The market position appears to be small scale with limited online presence and minimal content depth. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries. The site’s content and design are basic, suggesting a focus on cost-effective digital presence rather than extensive branding or marketing. The use of popular CMS and plugins indicates standard industry practices but no advanced customizations or integrations.

Security posture

Security measures are minimal but adequate for a small business website. HTTPS is properly configured, and cookie consent is implemented via Cookiebot, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the absence of security headers such as Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces protection against common web attacks. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response contacts are provided, which limits transparency and readiness for security incidents. The site should improve security hygiene by adding these headers, publishing security policies, and establishing clear incident response channels.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers including Content Security Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS to enhance protection against web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility and user support.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  5. Regularly audit and update all plugins and scripts to mitigate risks from outdated or vulnerable components.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Elementor, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot
Frameworks
Astra Theme, Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses WordPress with Astra theme and Elementor builder.
  2. Cookie consent implemented via Cookiebot, indicating GDPR awareness.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the content.
  5. No security headers detected in the HTML content.
  6. SSL is enabled and valid.
  7. External scripts include Facebook Pixel and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing.
  8. Content is minimal and lacks detailed business or legal information.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. No data protection officer or incident response contacts identified.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a standard WordPress CMS with Astra theme and Elementor page builder, supported by jQuery and Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. Hosting is provided by home.pl S.A., a reputable Polish hosting provider. Performance is moderate with no explicit indicators of slow loading but no advanced optimization detected. Mobile optimization is good due to responsive theme design. SEO is basic with minimal meta tags and no structured data detected. Accessibility features are limited. The site uses Cookiebot for cookie consent management, indicating some compliance with privacy regulations. Overall, the technical infrastructure is typical for a small business but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 comperiaraty.pl. 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 comperiaraty.pl.

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.