Security report for danfoss.com
Danfoss · Energy · Denmark
Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in Security headers.
Danfoss is a global enterprise specializing in engineering solutions that enhance machine productivity, reduce emissions, lower energy consumption, and enable electrification. The company positions itself as a family-owned business focused on long-term stakeholder value, targeting industrial and commercial sectors primarily in energy and transportation. The website reflects a mature digital presence with comprehensive content, strong branding, and professional design. Technically, the site leverages modern technologies including Google Tag Manager, Salesforce Commerce Cloud, Microsoft ASP.NET, and Auth0 for authentication, indicating a robust and scalable infrastructure. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and use of secure third-party services, though explicit security headers could be verified further. Privacy compliance is well addressed with detailed cookie consent mechanisms and comprehensive privacy policies. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable anomaly that slightly impacts trust but does not detract from the overall legitimacy given the professional web presence and trusted integrations. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security header transparency, publishing incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies, and improving direct contact information visibility.
Scanned
NIS2 and GDPR posture
- GDPR outside view
- 83/ 100 · Low
- Checks completed
- 7of 7
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
- (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
- (b) Incident handling: One indicator
- (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
- (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
- (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
- (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
- (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
- (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
- (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
- (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
1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.
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 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';…
- High
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
Keep watching danfoss.com
This scan found 11 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
- 90
- Security headers
- 75
- Email security
- 98
- DNS health
- 80
- Network security
- 100
- GDPR outside view
- 83
- Average
- 88
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
Security posture
Recommendations
- Verify and explicitly implement all recommended security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
- Publish a clear incident response policy and contact channels for security incidents to improve transparency and readiness.
- Implement and publish a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.
- Enhance visibility of direct company contact information including emails and phone numbers for better user trust and support.
- Regularly audit third-party scripts and integrations to ensure no vulnerabilities or privacy issues arise.
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
- Company
- Danfoss
- Description
- We engineer solutions that increase machine productivity, reduce emissions, lower energy consumption, and enable electrification. We are a family-owned company dedicated to creating long-term value for all our stakeholders.
- Key services
- Machine productivity solutions, Emission reduction technologies, Energy consumption optimization, Electrification enablement
- Content quality
- excellent
- Branding
- consistent
Technology
- Stack
- Google Tag Manager, Salesforce, Microsoft ASP.NET, Auth0, Cloudflare, Dynatrace, Cookie Information
- Frameworks
- ASP.NET Core
- Platforms
- Salesforce Commerce Cloud
- Performance
- moderate
- Mobile
- excellent
- Accessibility
- good
- SEO
- good
Security
- Observed score
- 85/100
- Good practices seen
- HTTPS enforced
- Use of secure cookies
- Third-party authentication via Auth0
- Consent management for cookies
Analytics and tracking
- Services
- Google Analytics, Dynatrace
- Tracking level
- moderate
- Privacy practices
- good
Advertising
- Ad networks
- Google Marketing Platform, LinkedIn, Microsoft Bing, DoubleClick, Leadfamly, Leadfeeder
- Tracking pixels
- Dynatrace
- Marketing tools
- Salesforce, Adform
- Transparency
- good
Site quality
- Design
- excellent
- User experience
- excellent
- Content relevance
- excellent
- Navigation
- excellent
- Professionalism
- excellent
- Trustworthiness
- high
Key observations
- Comprehensive cookie consent mechanism with detailed cookie categories and third-party services listed.
- Use of multiple trusted third-party platforms for analytics, marketing, and authentication.
- No exposed sensitive data or obvious security vulnerabilities detected in the HTML content.
- No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the provided HTML; contact is via form.
- Strong branding consistency and professional content presentation.
- No security.txt or explicit security policy page found.
- WHOIS data missing, which is unusual for a corporate domain.
Technical notes
Notes
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.
- MITRE CWE (opens in a new tab)4.20 (2026-04-30) · CWE Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP Top 10:2025 (opens in a new tab)2025 (membership per CWE 4.20) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- MITRE CAPEC (opens in a new tab)3.9 (2023-01-24) · CAPEC Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP ASVS (opens in a new tab)5.0.0 · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (opens in a new tab)latest (checklist.json, master) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Secure Headers Project (opens in a new tab)2026-10-18 · Apache-2.0
- Mozilla Server Side TLS (intermediate) (opens in a new tab)6.0 · MPL-2.0
- NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 (OSCAL catalog) (opens in a new tab)5.2.0 · Public domain (US Government work)
- Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 333, 27.12.2022 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 (opens in a new tab)OJ L, 18.10.2024 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy), consolidated (opens in a new tab)19.12.2009 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- RFC Editor metadata (opens in a new tab)per-RFC (obsolete RFCs rejected) · IETF Trust Legal Provisions (metadata only)
- NIST CSRC, W3C TR, IETF Datatracker, EDPB, EUR-Lex CELLAR and gesetze-bayern.de (opens in a new tab)per document · Titles and links only
- NIST NVD CVE API 2.0 (opens in a new tab)live records · Public domain (NVD); CVE® records © MITRE, free use
- W3C WCAG 2.2 (opens in a new tab)W3C Recommendation (wcag.json) · W3C Software and Document License
- ETSI EN 301 549 (opens in a new tab)V3.2.1 (2021-03), clause headings · Clause numbers and titles only (© ETSI)
- Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 151, 7.6.2019 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive (EU) 2016/2102 (Web Accessibility Directive) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 327, 2.12.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Retrieved 2026-10-25
Earlier scans of this domain
- 55/100Medium20 findingsView report
Feedback on this report
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with danfoss.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review danfoss.com.