Skip to main content

Security report for cruisegate-hamburg.de

Cruise Gate Hamburg GmbH · Transportation · Germany

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Cruise Gate Hamburg GmbH operates the cruise terminals in Hamburg, managing berth allocations and serving as the central contact for cruise operators. The company also markets Hamburg as a cruise destination internationally. The website is professionally designed, primarily in German, and targets cruise operators, passengers, and tourism stakeholders. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Video.js, with a CMS likely Kirby. It is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly, though some accessibility features are basic. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced, but lacks some security headers and explicit security policies. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism detected. Contact is mainly via forms, with no direct emails or phone numbers visible. Social media presence is strong, enhancing trust and engagement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
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

8 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

    • 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. Network security

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

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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 cruisegate-hamburg.de

This scan found 26 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
72
Security headers
90
Email security
70
DNS health
45
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
28
Average
51
After the cap
49

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 · found on this site
  • 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 company holds a central position in Hamburg's cruise industry as the operator of multiple cruise terminals including Steinwerder, Altona, HafenCity, and Baakenhöft. It serves cruise lines by managing berth assignments and promotes Hamburg as a cruise destination. The business model includes terminal operations, parking services, and event location offerings. The company is a 100% subsidiary of Hamburg Port Authority, indicating strong institutional backing. The website content and news updates reflect active engagement with industry events and passenger services. Partnerships include parking service providers like APCOA. The target customers are cruise operators, passengers, and event organizers. Growth indicators include new terminal openings and increasing passenger numbers.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible exposure of sensitive data. However, it lacks implementation of common security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which could improve protection against common web attacks. There is no published security policy or incident response contact, which limits transparency and readiness for security incidents. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present. Forms use datepickers and controlled inputs, reducing risk of injection attacks. Overall, the security posture is good but could be enhanced with additional headers and published policies to align with best practices and compliance requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply fully with GDPR cookie regulations.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users and meet WCAG standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Cruise Gate Hamburg GmbH
Description
Cruise Gate Hamburg ist zuständig für den Betrieb der Kreuzfahrtterminals in Hamburg und die Vergabe der Liegeplätze. CGH ist der zentrale Ansprechpartner für Kreuzfahrtreeder und vermarktet die Kreuzfahrtdestination Hamburg international.
Key services
Betrieb von Kreuzfahrtterminals, Liegeplatzvergabe für Kreuzfahrtschiffe, Vermarktung der Kreuzfahrtdestination Hamburg, Parkplatzbuchungen, Eventlocations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, jQuery UI, Video.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of datepicker with controlled inputs

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content in German language.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banner found, which may be a compliance gap.
  4. Social media presence is strong with official accounts linked.
  5. No direct email addresses or phone numbers found in the main HTML content; contact is via contact forms.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy found.
  7. Website uses HTTPS and modern JavaScript libraries.
  8. Content is focused on cruise terminal operations and related services in Hamburg.
  9. Legal pages (Impressum, AGB, Datenschutzbestimmung) are present and linked in footer.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern tech stack with jQuery, jQuery UI, and Video.js for multimedia content. The CMS appears to be Kirby, inferred from URL and template structure. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design elements and uses datepicker widgets for user input. Performance is moderate with some room for optimization. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit. The site lacks advanced frameworks but is stable and functional for its purpose.
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 cruisegate-hamburg.de. 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 cruisegate-hamburg.de.

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.