Skip to main content

Security report for eagronom.com

eAgronom · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

eAgronom is a technology company focused on enabling businesses to achieve sustainability goals while supporting farmers through improved revenue generation, soil quality, and financing access. The website presents a modern, well-designed interface built with Framer and integrates multiple analytics and tracking tools such as Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, and Facebook Pixel. However, the absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy and trustworthiness. The site lacks visible privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, as well as contact information, which impacts its privacy compliance and business credibility scores. Security posture is weak due to missing security headers and unclear SSL configuration. Overall, the website is functional and professional in design but requires improvements in security, compliance, and transparency to enhance trust and legitimacy.

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

7 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 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';…

  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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, LinkedIn, YouTube

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

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

Keep watching eagronom.com

This scan found 22 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
52
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
68

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 company targets organizations interested in sustainability and farmers, offering SaaS solutions that support sustainability goals and agricultural financing. The business model appears to be B2B SaaS with a focus on environmental and agricultural sectors. The website content is relevant and well-structured, indicating a medium-sized enterprise with consistent branding. However, the lack of publicly available WHOIS data and absence of contact details limit the ability to fully assess business credibility and market positioning. The use of advanced analytics and marketing tools suggests an active digital marketing strategy.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low due to missing security headers, no visible security policies, and lack of contact channels for incident response. The site uses HTTPS (implied by canonical URLs) but SSL configuration details are unknown. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. Compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations is questionable given the absence of privacy and cookie policies. Incident response readiness appears minimal with no security contact information found. The security culture and best practices need enhancement to reduce risk and improve user trust.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add visible contact information including emails and phone numbers for business and security incident reporting.
  3. Configure and enforce security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Verify and publish WHOIS registration details or use a verified domain to improve legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Conduct a security audit to identify and remediate any potential vulnerabilities and improve overall security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
eAgronom
Description
We enable companies to achieve their sustainability goals while supporting farmers in generating additional revenue, improving soil quality, and accessing better financing.
Key services
Sustainability goal enablement, Farmer revenue generation support, Soil quality improvement, Access to better financing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, Framer
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable, indicating possible unregistered domain or privacy protection.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the content.
  5. Site uses multiple analytics and tracking scripts including Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, and Facebook Pixel.
  6. Site built with Framer, indicating modern web design tools usage.
  7. No visible security headers or explicit security policies detected.
  8. No forms detected in the provided HTML content.
  9. Site targets companies interested in sustainability and farmers, offering SaaS services for sustainability goals and financing.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using Framer, a modern web design platform, and integrates multiple third-party analytics and marketing scripts. The technical implementation is generally good with proper meta tags and SEO optimizations. Mobile optimization and user experience are rated good. However, no explicit hosting provider or CMS beyond Framer was identified. Performance is moderate, likely influenced by multiple tracking scripts. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The absence of security headers and unclear SSL configuration represent technical risks that should be addressed to enhance security and compliance.
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 eagronom.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 eagronom.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.