Skip to main content

Security report for dotnice.com

dotNice International Limited · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

62/100

Risk levelMedium

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

dotNice International Limited operates a professional website focused on brand protection, domain management, and brand enforcement services. The company offers specialized services including domain portfolio management, enterprise DNS infrastructure management, digital brand enforcement, and intellectual property consultancy. The website is well-structured, multilingual, and uses modern web technologies such as WordPress, Bootstrap, and Google Tag Manager, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security measures include HTTPS, Google reCAPTCHA, and a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism, reflecting a good security posture. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and transparency, which should be addressed to enhance trust. Overall, the website presents a credible business presence with room for improvement in privacy policy visibility and security header implementation.

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

6 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 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google APIs

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

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

Keep watching dotnice.com

This scan found 17 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
62
Security headers
65
Email security
85
DNS health
90
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
62

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 dotnice.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
3
Employees
0
Customers
3
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

1 subdomain 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 dotnice.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 businesses requiring digital brand protection and domain management services, positioning itself as a niche provider in the technology sector. Its business model revolves around service provision with a focus on intellectual property and domain enforcement. The multilingual website and social media presence across major platforms suggest an international outreach. The lack of explicit company addresses or detailed registrant information limits full business intelligence assessment. The company appears small-sized, founded around 2014, with consistent branding and professional content supporting its market position.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses Google reCAPTCHA to mitigate bot attacks, alongside a detailed cookie consent banner supporting GDPR compliance. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, and there is no published security policy or incident response contact information. The absence of WHOIS data is a significant concern for domain legitimacy and could impact trust. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were observed in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is good but could be strengthened by adding security headers and transparency around security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a clear and accessible privacy policy page to improve privacy compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to ensure transparency and legitimacy.
  4. Add a security policy and incident response contact details to demonstrate security maturity and readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
dotNice International Limited
Description
Brand protection, domain management, brand monitoring, brand reputation, domain name surveillance, brand enforcement, domain recovery
Key services
Domain Name Portfolio Management, Enterprise DNS Infrastructure Management, Digital Brand Enforcement, Intellectual Property Consultancy & Legal Aid
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Google reCAPTCHA, CookieYes (Cookie Law Info plugin), WPML (Multilingual CMS), Contact Form 7, WP Live Chat Support, WP Emoji
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection
  • Cookie consent banner with granular controls

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Leadlander
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google
Tracking pixels
Leadlander (trackalyzer)
Marketing tools
CookieYes
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. Professional business site focused on brand protection and domain management
  3. Uses WordPress CMS with common plugins for SEO, multilingual support, and cookie compliance
  4. Has cookie consent banner with detailed categories and user controls
  5. No explicit privacy policy page found in the HTML content
  6. Terms and conditions/legal notice page is present
  7. Contact information includes phone number and live chat but no explicit email addresses found
  8. WHOIS data is missing or domain not found in WHOIS registry, raising legitimacy questions
  9. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  10. No explicit security policy or incident response contact information found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Bootstrap framework and uses jQuery for client-side scripting. It integrates Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics for marketing and analytics purposes, alongside Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection. The site is multilingual, supported by WPML plugin, and includes live chat functionality. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). The site uses a cookie consent plugin (CookieYes) with granular user controls, indicating attention to privacy compliance. Hosting provider details are not discernible from the content.
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. 66/100Medium23 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with dotnice.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 dotnice.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.