Skip to main content

Security report for davidjones.com.au

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.davidjones.com is currently inaccessible due to a Web Application Firewall (WAF) protection by Incapsula, which blocks direct content access. This prevents extraction of any meaningful business, technical, or security information from the site. The WHOIS lookup for the domain returned no registration data, indicating either the domain is unregistered, recently registered, or WHOIS data is restricted. Consequently, no registrant or domain age information is available to verify legitimacy or business claims. Without access to the site content or metadata, no privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies can be confirmed, nor can contact or incident response details be identified. The lack of visible content and metadata severely limits the ability to assess the company’s market position, services, or technical infrastructure. Security posture cannot be evaluated beyond the presence of Incapsula WAF blocking, which itself is a positive security control but also an obstacle for analysis.

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

7 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 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

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

Keep watching davidjones.com.au

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
67
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
65

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

Due to the absence of accessible content and WHOIS data, no reliable business intelligence can be derived. The domain appears to be protected or blocked, and no external links, social media, or contact information are available to infer partnerships, subsidiaries, or market positioning. The lack of visible branding or company information prevents assessment of competitive advantages, revenue streams, or customer segments. The domain’s legitimacy and operational status remain uncertain.

Security posture

The security posture is partially indicated by the presence of Incapsula WAF, which suggests an intent to protect the site from attacks and unauthorized access. However, no security headers, SSL configuration details, or vulnerability disclosures are available for review. The absence of privacy and cookie policies, as well as contact information for incident response, indicates gaps in compliance and transparency. The domain’s WHOIS data absence raises concerns about registration legitimacy. Overall, the security maturity cannot be fully assessed but the WAF presence is a positive sign.

Recommendations

  1. Work with hosting and security providers to allow safe access for security and compliance analysis, possibly via whitelisting or staging environment.
  2. Ensure domain registration details are properly published and WHOIS data is accurate and accessible to improve trust.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to meet compliance requirements.
  4. Implement and expose security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  5. Provide clear contact information including security incident response and data protection officer contacts.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Incapsula detected. Site content is blocked by Incapsula WAF as indicated by iframe with Incapsula resource and incident ID message. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Incapsula

Analytics and tracking

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to Incapsula WAF blocking.
  2. No metadata, structured data, or visible content available for analysis.
  3. No contact, policy, or business information found in the HTML.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable or domain is unregistered according to raw WHOIS output.
  5. No external links or scripts beyond Incapsula resources detected.
  6. No security headers or SSL configuration details available.
  7. No evidence of privacy or cookie policies or compliance mechanisms.
  8. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected.
  9. No social media or contact information found.
  10. Content safety is rated safe by default due to lack of content.
Technical notes

Notes

The technical infrastructure is largely unknown due to the WAF blocking all content except an iframe referencing Incapsula resources. No CMS, frameworks, or hosting provider information is detectable. The site uses Incapsula for web application firewall protection, which is a modern security technology. Performance, accessibility, SEO, and mobile optimization cannot be assessed. The lack of metadata and structured data indicates minimal or no SEO optimization. The site requires modernization to improve transparency and accessibility.
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 davidjones.com.au. 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 davidjones.com.au.

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.