Skip to main content

Security report for ebasefm.com

ebase Software · Technology · N/a

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

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

ebase Software provides a comprehensive suite of facility management software solutions designed to streamline operations such as work orders, asset management, facility inspections, and more. The company targets facility management professionals and organizations seeking to enhance operational efficiency through digital tools. The website demonstrates a professional and consistent brand presence with a focus on simplifying facility management processes. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using Elementor and related plugins, indicating a modern and maintainable infrastructure. Performance and mobile optimization are good, though accessibility could be improved. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and no obvious vulnerabilities, but lacks advanced security headers and published security policies. The absence of WHOIS data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, though the active and professional website mitigates some risk. Privacy and cookie policies are missing, which impacts compliance and trust. Overall, the site is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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 ebasefm.com

This scan found 29 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
42
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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

ebase operates in the technology sector, specifically providing SaaS solutions for facility management. Their product suite covers a broad range of facility management needs, positioning them as a versatile provider in this niche. The business model likely revolves around subscription-based software licensing. The website content and structure suggest a small-sized company focused on delivering specialized software solutions. There is no evidence of parent or subsidiary companies. The lack of contact details and WHOIS information limits external validation of business credibility. The company appears to emphasize operational efficiency and digital transformation for facilities, targeting professional users. Marketing tools are minimal, focusing on SEO optimization. The absence of social media presence or external partnerships on the site suggests a direct-to-customer approach.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted communications. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which could improve protection against common web attacks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were found in the analyzed content. The site lacks published security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure programs, which are important for transparency and trust. No security.txt file or dedicated security contact emails were identified. The absence of privacy and cookie policies also indicates compliance gaps, particularly with GDPR. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by adding security headers, formal policies, and incident response information.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers for support and security incidents.
  4. Create and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users and comply with standards.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ebase Software
Description
Unlock the potential of your facility management operations with ebase's comprehensive solutions for enhanced efficiency.
Key services
Work Orders, Facility Rentals, Digital Logbooks, Form Logic, Facility Inspections, Project Manager, Operations Manager, Safe Workplace, Asset Manager, Registrations
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, jQuery, Swiper, Ultimate Elementor, WPForms, Elementskit
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data found
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Marketing tools
Rank Math SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. WHOIS data is missing or unavailable, raising questions about domain registration status.
  3. Website uses modern WordPress CMS with Elementor and related plugins.
  4. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage or linked pages.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided content.
  6. No social media links detected in the analyzed content.
  7. Website content is focused on facility management software solutions with multiple modules.
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  9. No incident response or security policy information found.
  10. SSL is enabled and appears properly configured.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder and several plugins including WPForms and Elementskit, indicating a modern and extensible platform. The use of jQuery and Swiper libraries supports interactive and responsive UI elements. SEO is enhanced by the Rank Math plugin, with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) implemented for organization, website, and article schema. Performance is moderate with some optimization for mobile devices. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not available from the provided data. The site uses standard web fonts from Google Fonts and loads resources securely over HTTPS. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance tuning.
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 ebasefm.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 ebasefm.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.