Skip to main content

Security report for cyberpatrol.com

SafeToNet Limited · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 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

CyberPatrol is a legacy parental control software brand that has been operational for over 20 years, now integrated into SafeToNet Limited. The company provides software solutions aimed at protecting families and businesses from inappropriate online content, focusing on parental controls and device protection across Windows, macOS, and iOS platforms. The website serves primarily as a transition and branding page directing users to SafeToNet, reflecting a mature business with a clear market position in online family safety software. Technically, the website uses a moderate technology stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google services such as reCAPTCHA and Tag Manager, indicating a basic but functional digital infrastructure. The site is served over HTTPS with no visible blocking or WAF mechanisms, but lacks comprehensive privacy and cookie policies, contact information, and detailed security disclosures. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and reCAPTCHA, but could be improved with additional security headers and transparency. Overall, the website is moderately professional but limited in content and compliance features, suggesting room for enhancement in privacy compliance and user engagement.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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. 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

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  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 cyberpatrol.com

This scan found 20 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
77
Security headers
50
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
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 business operates in the technology sector, specifically in parental control and online safety software. It targets families and businesses concerned with online content filtering and device protection. The business model is subscription-based software licensing, with offerings for individual desktops and family device bundles. The company benefits from a long operational history and integration with SafeToNet, which strengthens its market position. The website indicates a small-sized company based in the United Kingdom. The partnership ecosystem includes SafeToNet as the parent company. Revenue streams likely derive from software sales and subscriptions. The website's minimal content and lack of direct contact details suggest a focus on brand transition rather than direct sales or support via this domain.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and use of Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended best practices. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The absence of a vulnerability disclosure policy or incident response contact information indicates gaps in security transparency and readiness. GDPR compliance indicators are minimal due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the security posture is functional but could be significantly improved by adopting comprehensive security policies, headers, and incident response mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with GDPR compliance details.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and vulnerability disclosure channels.
  4. Improve mobile optimization and accessibility to enhance user experience and compliance.
  5. Develop and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response plan to build trust and security culture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
SafeToNet Limited
Description
CyberPatrol software helped families and businesses protect themselves from pornography online for over 20 years. The technology is now part of SafeToNet, offering parental control software and family protection solutions.
Key services
Parental control software, Online content filtering, Device protection for PC, Mac, and iOS
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap 3.0.2, Modernizr 2.0.6, Google reCAPTCHA, Google Tag Manager
Platforms
Windows, macOS, iOS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a legacy brand now integrated into SafeToNet Limited.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage HTML.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses explicitly listed on the homepage.
  4. Use of modern security tools like Google reCAPTCHA and HTTPS.
  5. Basic marketing and analytics integration via Google Tag Manager.
  6. Content is minimal and focused on brand transition messaging.
  7. No visible forms on the homepage to collect user data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a legacy but stable technology stack including jQuery 1.7.1, Bootstrap 3.0.2, and Modernizr 2.0.6, which are somewhat outdated but functional. Google Tag Manager and reCAPTCHA are integrated for analytics and security. The CMS identified is Flynn, which is less common and may limit extensibility. Performance is moderate with no explicit speed optimizations detected. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with room for improvement. The site lacks modern frameworks or progressive web app features. Technical risks include potential outdated libraries and lack of advanced security headers. Modernization opportunities include updating JavaScript libraries, improving SEO and accessibility, and enhancing security configurations.
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 cyberpatrol.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 cyberpatrol.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.