Skip to main content

Security report for ed.cz

eD group · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

eD group is a large technology holding operating primarily in Central Europe, focusing on IT distribution, software solutions, digital marketing, and e-commerce. The group comprises several subsidiaries specializing in various IT and technology sectors, serving a broad B2B audience. Their market position is strong, with partnerships with major global brands and a comprehensive portfolio of services. The website reflects a mature digital presence with modern technologies and good user experience. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, though some advanced security headers and policies could be improved. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust assessment but the professional presentation and detailed business information support legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing incident response policies, and adding a security.txt file.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

6 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

    • 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, Google APIs

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

  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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

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

Keep watching ed.cz

This scan found 24 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
55
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
65

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 ed.cz, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
523
Employees
0
Customers
523
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
12%

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 ed.cz.

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 holds a leading position in IT B2B distribution in Czech and Slovak markets, with a diversified portfolio including software development, digital marketing, and training services. Their subsidiaries cover a wide range of IT services and products, targeting resellers, integrators, and end customers. The presence of numerous partnerships with global brands like Microsoft, Samsung, HP, and Dell strengthens their market credibility. The business model is based on providing high-quality products and services with strong support and analytics tools. Growth indicators include multiple innovative projects and a large team of experts. The company maintains a professional online presence with clear contact channels and detailed leadership profiles.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and implements Google reCAPTCHA on contact forms to mitigate spam. Cookie consent is managed via a dedicated plugin with clear user options. However, no explicit security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) were detected, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No security.txt or incident response information is published, limiting transparency for vulnerability reporting. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved with additional headers and published policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve transparency.
  3. Create and publish an incident response policy and contact information for security incidents.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
eD group
Description
Technologická skupina působící ve střední Evropě v oblasti IT, obchodu, softwarových řešení, komunikace, e-commerce a technologií.
Key services
IT distribution, Software solutions, Digital marketing and communication, Training and education, Innovative technology projects
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics (gtag.js), jQuery, AOS animations, Google Maps API, Contact Form 7 WordPress plugin, Cookies and Content Security Policy plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on contact form
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Digital First Marketing Group services
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected.
  3. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain trust analysis.
  4. Comprehensive cookie and privacy policies present with consent mechanisms.
  5. Multiple subsidiaries and partner companies clearly listed.
  6. Contact information is complete with phone, address, and contact form.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  8. No security.txt or explicit security/incident response policies found.
  9. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, utilizing modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and AOS for animations. Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics are integrated for tracking and analytics. The site uses Contact Form 7 for form management and a cookie consent plugin to comply with privacy regulations. Google Maps API is used for location display. The site is mobile responsive with good navigation and SEO optimization. Performance is moderate, with lazy loading implemented for images. Technical debt appears low, but security headers are missing, representing a potential risk. Hosting provider details are not disclosed.
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 ed.cz. 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 ed.cz.

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.