Skip to main content

Security report for cool.co

the COOL company · Media · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The COOL company operates as an established advertising technology and media services provider, delivering solutions such as media attribution, dynamic creative optimization, franchise marketing, publisher experiences, and supply-side platform services. The company targets a broad audience including advertisers, publishers, franchise brands, agencies, and media professionals. Their market position is strong, supported by a long industry presence since 1996 and trusted partnerships with top publishers and brands. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern libraries like jQuery, Bootstrap, and Swiper.js, optimized for mobile and SEO, though performance is moderate. Security posture is good with HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data, but lacks explicit security headers and public security policies. Privacy compliance is weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but could improve transparency and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

6 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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  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

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

Keep watching cool.co

This scan found 22 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
57
Security headers
25
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
70

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 COOL company is positioned as a medium-sized player in the media sector, offering a comprehensive suite of advertising solutions that cater to various stakeholders in the advertising ecosystem. Their business model revolves around technology-enabled advertising services, including attribution analytics, creative automation, and local franchise marketing. The company leverages partnerships and certifications (e.g., Google-certified experts) to maintain competitive advantage. Their client testimonials and long-standing industry presence indicate a mature and credible operation. The presence of a related domain (coolmedia.ai) suggests an expanding ecosystem. Revenue streams likely include software services, media buying, and technology licensing.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good baseline security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data leaks. However, it lacks several security best practices such as security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) and publicly available security or incident response policies. There is no evidence of a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file, which limits transparency and responsiveness to security issues. Privacy compliance is insufficient, with no privacy or cookie policies detected, potentially exposing the company to regulatory risks. The absence of direct contact channels for security incidents further weakens incident response readiness. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but requires enhancements to meet best practices and compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Implement and configure security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Establish and publicize an incident response policy and provide dedicated security contact channels.
  4. Create a vulnerability disclosure policy and host a security.txt file at the root domain.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing direct contact information including emails and phone numbers for business and security inquiries.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
the COOL company
Description
We create a better experience for everyone in the advertising space, from advertisers to publishers, franchise brands to agencies, consumers to media professionals
Key services
Media & Attribution, DCO & Creative Automation, Franchise & Multi-Location Marketing, Publisher Experiences, Supply-Side Platform
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.7.1, Bootstrap 4.3.1, Bootstrap Select 1.13.9, Swiper.js, AOS (Animate On Scroll), Yoast SEO plugin
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of modern libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Connatix
Tracking pixels
Google Ads (gtag.js)
Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured
  2. Content is comprehensive and targeted to advertising and media professionals
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found on homepage or linked pages
  4. Contact information is limited to a contact form; no direct emails or phone numbers found
  5. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  6. No security policy or incident response information publicly available
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file detected
  8. No suspicious or malicious indicators found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using a modern tech stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, Swiper.js, and AOS for animations. SEO is enhanced via the Yoast SEO plugin, and Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and advertising tracking. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple external scripts and large media assets such as videos and images. There is no explicit hosting provider identified. Technical debt appears low, but improvements can be made in security configurations and privacy compliance. The site architecture supports scalability and user engagement through interactive elements and client testimonials.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 70/100Medium31 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with cool.co. 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 cool.co.

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.