Skip to main content

Security report for coruna.es

Ayuntamiento de A Coruña / Concello da Coruña · Government · Spain

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website coruna.es is the official digital presence of the City Council of A Coruña, Spain, serving as a comprehensive portal for municipal services, citizen engagement, and local government information. It targets residents and visitors, offering access to electronic services, news, events, and administrative procedures. The site is well-branded and consistent with government standards, providing content primarily in Galician with Spanish alternatives. Technically, the site uses a modern tech stack including jQuery, Ionic Framework, FullCalendar, and Leaflet for interactive maps, hosted on an Oracle FutureTense Content Server with CDN support from ZENEDGE. However, performance is moderate to slow, and accessibility is basic. Security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of modern TLS support, which is a critical issue for user trust and data protection. The site implements a robust cookie consent mechanism aligned with GDPR requirements but lacks explicit contact information and security policies. WHOIS data confirms domain legitimacy and consistency with the municipal entity. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires urgent security improvements to ensure safe user interactions.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

10 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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. 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"

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

Keep watching coruna.es

This scan found 23 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
35
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
45

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 City Council of A Coruña operates this website as a government service platform, positioning itself as the authoritative source for municipal information and citizen services. The business model is public service oriented, funded by government budgets, focusing on transparency, accessibility, and community engagement. The site integrates with partner domains for contracting and identity services, indicating a mature ecosystem. The presence of social media links and event promotion suggests active community outreach. The lack of direct contact details on the homepage may reflect a centralized contact strategy or privacy considerations. The site’s content and structure support a broad audience including residents, businesses, and visitors, with key services spanning urban planning, public transport, employment, and cultural activities.

Security posture

Security maturity is currently low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate, no HSTS policy, and lack of support for modern TLS protocols. While some security headers like X-Content-Type-Options and X-XSS-Protection are present, critical protections such as DNSSEC, DMARC, and OCSP stapling are missing. The cookie consent mechanism is well implemented, showing awareness of privacy regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found, which limits transparency and preparedness. The site uses HttpOnly cookies, reducing some risk of client-side attacks. Overall, the security posture exposes users to potential risks, especially regarding data confidentiality and integrity during transmission.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate immediately to enable secure HTTPS connections.
  2. Implement HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload directives to enforce HTTPS usage.
  3. Upgrade server configuration to support TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols and disable legacy protocols.
  4. Add DMARC DNS records and enable DNSSEC to enhance email and DNS security.
  5. Publish clear security and incident response policies to improve transparency and trust.
  6. Include explicit contact information for security and general inquiries to facilitate communication.
  7. Optimize website performance and accessibility to improve user experience and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages a mature technology stack with popular JavaScript libraries and frameworks such as jQuery, Ionic, FullCalendar, and Leaflet for rich interactive features. Hosting is via Oracle FutureTense Content Server 12c with CDN support from ZENEDGE, ensuring scalability. However, performance metrics are poor or missing, indicating potential slow load times. The site is mobile optimized and uses responsive design techniques. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. The lack of valid SSL and modern TLS support is a significant technical debt and security risk. The site uses Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking, integrated with a cookie consent mechanism that respects user preferences.
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 coruna.es. 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 coruna.es.

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.