Skip to main content

Security report for deutscherdigitalaward.de

BVDW · Media · Germany

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Deutscher Digital Award (DDA) is a prominent award platform recognizing innovative digital projects within the DACH region, organized by BVDW. The website serves as a comprehensive resource for award categories, jury members, and event information, targeting creative professionals in the digital industry. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with Elementor and JetEngine, supported by Borlabs Cookie for consent management. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and modern TLS protocols significantly weakens its security posture. While SPF is configured for email, the lack of DMARC and other security headers exposes potential risks. The site demonstrates good SEO and user experience but suffers from slow performance due to large page size and resource count. Overall, the platform is well-positioned in the media sector but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

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

4 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

  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 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 deutscherdigitalaward.de

This scan found 17 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. 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
100
Security headers
70
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
72

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 DDA operates as an award organizer within the media sector, focusing on digital innovation in the DACH region. Its business model revolves around event hosting, sponsorships, and partnerships with industry leaders such as DMEXCO and Microsoft Advertising. The target audience includes digital creatives and agencies seeking recognition. The partnership ecosystem is strong, with multiple media partners and sponsors enhancing market reach. The website content and structure indicate a medium-sized organization with a professional brand presence. Growth indicators include annual award events and extensive jury participation. Revenue streams likely include sponsorships, entry fees, and media partnerships.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low to moderate. Key vulnerabilities include the lack of a valid SSL certificate, absence of modern TLS protocols, and missing security headers. Email security is partially addressed with SPF but lacks DMARC enforcement. The cookie consent mechanism is implemented, supporting GDPR compliance. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are publicly available, indicating gaps in security governance. The website does not provide contact channels for security incidents, which could delay response to threats. Overall, the security culture appears basic, with room for significant improvement to meet industry standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and protect data in transit.
  2. Enable TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols and disable insecure protocols to strengthen encryption.
  3. Implement HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload to prevent protocol downgrade attacks.
  4. Configure a DMARC policy to complement SPF and reduce email spoofing risks.
  5. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  6. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  7. Establish clear incident response contact channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ email addresses).
  8. Optimize website performance by reducing page size and resource count to improve load times.
  9. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users.
  10. Maintain and regularly update privacy and cookie policies to ensure ongoing compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using Elementor and JetEngine plugins, indicating a modern but plugin-dependent infrastructure. It uses jQuery and several JavaScript libraries for UI and functionality enhancements. Hosting is provided by agenturserver.de, with DNS managed by ns-serve.net. Performance metrics show a slow load time (16.7 seconds) and a large page size (~757 KB) with 171 resources, suggesting optimization opportunities. The absence of SSL/TLS support is a critical technical risk. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin and structured data (JSON-LD) for rich snippets. Cookie management is handled by Borlabs Cookie, supporting GDPR compliance. The technical stack is typical for medium-sized digital media sites but requires modernization in security and performance.
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 deutscherdigitalaward.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 deutscherdigitalaward.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.