Skip to main content

Security report for deka.de

DekaBank · Finance · Germany

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

DekaBank operates a comprehensive investment and asset management website targeting private customers in Germany. The site offers detailed information on investment funds, certificates, retirement planning, and digital asset management solutions. It is well-branded, professionally designed, and provides multiple contact channels including phone, contact forms, and social media. The website demonstrates strong market positioning as a leading German financial services provider with close ties to the Sparkassen-Finanzgruppe. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript frameworks such as Vue.js and integrates tools like Google Tag Manager and Highstock.js for analytics and data visualization. However, the security posture is weakened by the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS support, which is a critical vulnerability. Security headers are well configured but cannot compensate for the missing TLS encryption. Privacy compliance is strong with GDPR-aligned policies and cookie consent mechanisms in place. Overall, the site is content-rich and trustworthy but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and maintain credibility.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of deka.de. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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

3 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

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

Keep watching deka.de

This scan found 14 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
50
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
64

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

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 deka.de, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
959
Employees
1
Customers
897
Third parties
61
Weak passwords
68%

Latest record dated 2025-07-25 · 7 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 deka.de.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –training.deka.de2025-07-25

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

DekaBank is a large financial institution specializing in investment funds and asset management services primarily for private customers in Germany. Its business model focuses on providing professional investment solutions, retirement planning, and digital asset management platforms. The company leverages its partnership with the Sparkassen-Finanzgruppe to maintain a strong market presence. Revenue streams likely include fund management fees, certificate issuance, and advisory services. The website's extensive content and multiple service offerings indicate a mature digital strategy aimed at customer engagement and retention. Partnerships with platforms like bevestor highlight a move towards digital wealth management. The company maintains a robust brand image supported by numerous industry awards and certifications. The target customer segment is retail investors seeking sustainable and diversified investment options.

Security posture

The website exhibits a moderate security maturity level with several best practices implemented such as strict transport security headers, XSS protection, content security policies, and frame options. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of HTTPS support represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, indicating potential gaps in transparency and preparedness. The site does not implement OCSP stapling or session resumption, which could impact performance and security. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found, limiting avenues for responsible vulnerability reporting. Overall, while header configurations are good, the fundamental lack of TLS encryption severely undermines the security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Immediately obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable deprecated protocols.
  3. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and trust.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program including a security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern JavaScript frameworks, notably Vue.js, and integrates third-party libraries such as Highstock.js for charting and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The HTML structure is valid and SEO optimized with comprehensive meta tags and Open Graph data. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and accessibility features. However, performance metrics indicate slow loading times, possibly due to large resource sizes or server response delays. Hosting provider and CMS are not explicitly identified. The site uses cookies and tracking scripts consistent with GDPR compliance. Technical debt is moderate, with the critical issue being the lack of SSL/TLS encryption, which is a significant risk for business operations and user trust.
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. 77/100Low31 findingsView report
  2. 77/100Low31 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with deka.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 deka.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.