Skip to main content

Security report for contrastcompany.nl

CONTRAST · Hospitality · Netherlands

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and Network security.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

CONTRAST is a newly established Dutch company specializing in facility and hospitality services, as reflected by their website content and domain registration data. The website is professionally designed using WordPress with a modern theme and builder, supporting multilingual content in Dutch and English. The technical infrastructure includes integrations with Google Tag Manager and ActiveCampaign for analytics and marketing automation, alongside a compliant cookie consent mechanism via Cookiebot. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and no visible vulnerabilities, though security headers and explicit security policies are absent. Privacy compliance is partially met with cookie consent but lacks a visible privacy policy or terms of service. Overall, the website presents a credible and professional front for a small business in the hospitality sector.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 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 Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • 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. 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 contrastcompany.nl

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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
95
Average
63

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention contrastcompany.nl, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for contrastcompany.nl right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 the hospitality and facility management sectors in the Netherlands, positioning itself as a service provider with a focus on quality and professionalism. The business model revolves around providing facility and hospitality services, likely to corporate or commercial clients. The website's use of marketing automation and analytics tools suggests an intent to engage and convert visitors effectively. The domain age and hosting provider align with a new but legitimate business operation. No partnerships or subsidiaries are explicitly identified, indicating an independent small business setup.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and a cookie consent mechanism, indicating awareness of basic security and privacy requirements. However, the absence of security headers and a published security policy or incident response contact reduces the overall security maturity. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The lack of a security.txt file or vulnerability disclosure channel suggests limited readiness for coordinated vulnerability reporting. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with additional best practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure and improve security transparency.
  4. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for customer support and incident response.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
CONTRAST
Description
CONTRAST is a company operating in the facility and hospitality sector, offering services related to these industries. The website content is primarily in Dutch with an English version available, targeting hospitality and facility management clients.
Key services
Facility management, Hospitality services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, ActiveCampaign, Cookiebot, WPBakery Page Builder, Salient Theme
Frameworks
WPML (multilingual)
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent banner
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
ActiveCampaign
Marketing tools
ActiveCampaign
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS with valid SSL.
  2. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via Cookiebot.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage or in metadata.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the visible content or metadata.
  5. Website is built on WordPress with Salient theme and WPBakery Page Builder.
  6. Google Tag Manager and ActiveCampaign are used for analytics and marketing automation.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page detected.
  8. No explicit security policy or incident response contact information found.
  9. No social media links explicitly found in the provided HTML snippet.
  10. Website content is primarily in Dutch with English alternate language available.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using the Salient theme and WPBakery Page Builder, indicating a standard but flexible infrastructure. It integrates Google Tag Manager and ActiveCampaign for analytics and marketing automation, showing a moderate level of digital maturity. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and multilingual support via WPML. Hosting is provided by Xynta Hosting B.V., a Dutch hosting provider consistent with the business location. There is room for technical improvement in security headers and accessibility enhancements.
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 contrastcompany.nl. 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 contrastcompany.nl.

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.