Skip to main content

Security report for deletselschaderaad.nl

Stichting De Letselschade Raad · Government · Netherlands

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Stichting De Letselschade Raad is a Dutch non-profit organization focused on improving the personal injury claims process by collaborating with professional parties in the sector. It acts as an independent register and quality overseer, developing behavior codes, guidelines, and providing general information to victims and professionals. The organization is government-supported and recognized within the Dutch legal and healthcare sectors. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with common plugins like Yoast SEO and WP Rocket for performance optimization. However, a critical security shortfall is the lack of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which significantly impacts the site's security posture. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant with an opt-in consent mechanism. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

8 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 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

  2. 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';…

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

Keep watching deletselschaderaad.nl

This scan found 19 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
15
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
50

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 organization holds a strong market position as an authoritative body in the Dutch injury claims sector, collaborating with multiple professional associations and government bodies. Its business model is non-profit, focusing on quality assurance and standardization rather than commercial revenue. The target audience includes victims of injury, legal professionals, insurers, and healthcare providers. The presence of the Nationaal Keurmerk Letselschade certification adds to its credibility. The website content is well-structured and relevant, supporting its mission. Partnerships and collaborations are evident but no explicit partner domains are linked. Growth indicators include ongoing activities, expert meetings, and public communications.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and a valid SSL certificate, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No advanced security headers or mechanisms like HSTS, OCSP stapling, or session resumption are implemented. The site does not disclose any security or incident response policies, which limits transparency. However, no known vulnerabilities or subdomain takeover risks were detected. The privacy and cookie consent mechanisms are well implemented, indicating some compliance maturity. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues is critical to improve security and user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  3. Enable HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to enforce secure connections.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
  5. Regularly audit and update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website runs on WordPress 6.8.1 with jQuery and uses WP Rocket for caching and performance optimization. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin. Google Fonts and Google Tag Manager are integrated for typography and analytics respectively. Hosting is provided by TransIP, a reputable Dutch hosting provider. The site is mobile optimized and has good navigation clarity. However, performance metrics are not available, and the lack of HTTPS is a significant technical deficiency. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. The site uses lazy loading for images and videos to optimize load times. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard but requires security upgrades.
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 deletselschaderaad.nl. 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 deletselschaderaad.nl.

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.