Skip to main content

Security report for dc-aviation.com

DC Aviation Group · Transportation · Germany

Partial score · DNS & email only

69/100

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

DC Aviation Group operates as a premium aircraft management company based in Germany, offering services including aircraft maintenance, aviation consulting, and executive charter. The website is professionally designed using TYPO3 CMS and targets business aviation clients and aircraft owners. The company positions itself as a premium service provider in the transportation sector with a medium-sized business profile. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies, including Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection and Cookiebot for GDPR-compliant cookie consent management. The site is mobile optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and bot protection mechanisms in place, though the absence of explicit security headers and privacy policy pages suggests room for improvement. The WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, which raises some concerns about domain registration transparency, but the website content and structure indicate a legitimate business operation. Overall, the site scores well on content quality, technical implementation, and security, but should address privacy and WHOIS transparency to enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
6of 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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

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

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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 dc-aviation.com

This scan found 13 issues across 5 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. See sample alerts.

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
100
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
88
Average
69

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention dc-aviation.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
9
Employees
0
Customers
8
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
44%

3 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for dc-aviation.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

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 targets a niche market in business aviation, focusing on aircraft management and related services. Its business model revolves around providing premium, tailored services to aircraft owners and operators, including maintenance and charter solutions. The website's multilingual support (German and English) indicates an international or European client base. The use of professional CMS and integration of analytics and marketing tools suggests a mature digital presence. However, the lack of visible contact details and corporate registration information on the site limits direct customer engagement and transparency. The absence of WHOIS data may be due to privacy protection but should be clarified to avoid trust issues. The company appears to maintain a focused partnership ecosystem, leveraging Google services for analytics and advertising, but no explicit partner or subsidiary domains were identified.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security baseline with HTTPS enabled and Google reCAPTCHA implemented to mitigate automated abuse. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the site lacks explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to harden security further. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analyzed content. The absence of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency and preparedness visibility. The missing WHOIS registration data is a concern for domain legitimacy verification. Overall, the security posture is good but can be improved by adding security headers, publishing security policies, and clarifying domain registration details.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve compliance and transparency.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection) to enhance website security.
  3. Verify and disclose WHOIS registration information to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate security readiness.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
DC Aviation Group
Description
DC Aviation Group - Ihr premium Aircraft Manager ➤ Aircraft Maintenance ✔ Aviation Consulting ✔ Executive Charter ▶ Jetzt kontaktieren!
Key services
Aircraft Maintenance, Aviation Consulting, Executive Charter
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
TYPO3 CMS, JavaScript, Google reCAPTCHA, Cookiebot
Frameworks
TYPO3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google AdSense
Tracking pixels
Google Ads conversion tracking, Cookiebot tracking
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. Uses TYPO3 CMS with modern JavaScript libraries.
  3. Cookie consent and GDPR compliance mechanisms are implemented.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found in provided content.
  5. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, raising some trust concerns.
  6. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  7. Website content is in German with English alternate language versions.
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  9. No explicit data protection officer contact information found.
  10. Uses Google services for analytics and advertising.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on TYPO3 CMS, a robust and widely used content management system, indicating a stable technical foundation. It uses modern JavaScript libraries and integrates Google reCAPTCHA for bot mitigation and Cookiebot for cookie consent management. The site loads CSS and JS assets efficiently, though performance is moderate, suggesting potential optimization opportunities. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are properly configured, including viewport settings and structured data (JSON-LD) for breadcrumbs. No hosting provider information was explicitly found. The site uses Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for tracking, reflecting a mature analytics setup. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from performance tuning and enhanced 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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 40/100High26 findings · partial scanView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with dc-aviation.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 dc-aviation.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.