Skip to main content

Security report for confidex.com

Confidex · Technology · Finland

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Confidex is a mature and reputable company specializing in RFID, NFC, and BLE solutions for industries, logistics, and mobility sectors. Recently acquired by Beontag, a global leader in graphic and label materials and RFID technology, Confidex strengthens its global presence and service localization. The website reflects a professional and comprehensive digital presence with strong branding and relevant content targeting industrial and supply chain customers. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks like Next.js and React, hosted on AWS CloudFront, with good SEO and accessibility practices. However, the lack of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support is a critical security gap that significantly impacts the overall security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. The domain registration data confirms the legitimacy and maturity of the business. Strategic improvements in SSL/TLS configuration and incident response readiness are recommended to enhance trust and security.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching confidex.com

This scan found 17 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
0
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
18
Average
40

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

Confidex operates in the technology and manufacturing sectors, focusing on RFID and IoT enablers for supply chain, logistics, and mobility industries. The acquisition by Beontag indicates strategic growth and market consolidation. The company leverages a global reseller and distributor network, serving diverse industries across multiple continents. Its business model is B2B, providing hardware and software solutions for digital transformation and sustainability. The website content and structure support a strong market position with clear product categories, applications, and resources. Partnerships and certifications further reinforce its credibility. The company targets industrial clients requiring high-quality, innovative RFID solutions.

Security posture

The website implements several security best practices including a robust Content Security Policy, HSTS with subdomain inclusion, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Referrer-Policy headers. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and enabled TLS protocols is a major vulnerability, exposing users to potential interception and undermining trust. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is found, indicating room for improvement in security transparency and readiness. Cookie consent is managed via a reputable third-party service, supporting GDPR compliance. Overall, the security posture is moderate but critically impacted by missing HTTPS.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and correctly install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure all communications.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and configure OCSP stapling and session resumption for improved security and performance.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  4. Regularly review and update Content Security Policy to minimize risks from unsafe scripts or external resources.
  5. Maintain and enhance privacy compliance by monitoring cookie consent mechanisms and updating privacy policies as regulations evolve.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technology stack including Next.js and React, styled with Tailwind CSS, and hosted on AWS CloudFront with assets served from Amazon S3. It integrates analytics and marketing tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and CookieYes for cookie consent management. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO metadata and Open Graph tags. Performance data is not available, but the use of CDN and modern frameworks suggests moderate to good performance. The absence of SSL/TLS is a critical technical flaw. The site structure is well organized with clear navigation and resource links, supporting a positive user experience.
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 confidex.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 confidex.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.