Skip to main content

Security report for energy-infrastructure-partners.com

Energy Infrastructure Partners · Energy · Denmark

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and Network security.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Energy Infrastructure Partners is a specialized investment firm focused on energy infrastructure projects emphasizing electrification, decarbonization, and energy security. Founded in 2019, the company positions itself as a strategic partner for investments in the evolving energy sector. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, targeting investors and stakeholders interested in sustainable energy infrastructure. Technically, the site is built on WordPress, leveraging modern analytics and cookie consent tools, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, though improvements such as enabling DNSSEC and adding security headers are recommended. Privacy compliance is well addressed with a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent banner. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professionally maintained, though it lacks explicit contact information and published security or incident response policies.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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. 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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching energy-infrastructure-partners.com

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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
83
Average
58

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 operates in the energy sector with a focus on infrastructure investments that support societal electrification and decarbonization trends. Its business model revolves around strategic investments rather than direct energy production or services. The domain age and WHOIS data align with the company's founding date, supporting legitimacy. The website's content and structured data reinforce its market positioning as a niche investment partner. The absence of contact details and terms of service pages suggests a focus on controlled stakeholder engagement rather than broad public interaction. The use of Hubspot indicates marketing and lead generation efforts. No direct partnerships or subsidiaries are identified from the website content.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted communications. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot, indicating GDPR compliance and user privacy respect. No advanced security headers were detected in the HTML, and DNSSEC is not enabled, representing areas for enhancement. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were found in the analyzed content. The site lacks published security policies or incident response contacts, which could improve transparency and readiness. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from additional hardening and policy disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  4. Add a terms of service page to clarify user agreements and legal protections.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins to ensure no vulnerabilities or outdated components.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Energy Infrastructure Partners
Description
The electrification of society and booming demand for power. The push to decarbonize. The increasing focus on energy independence and security. All of these elements form the basis of Energy Infrastructure Partners' investment strategy.
Key services
Investment strategy focused on electrification, Decarbonization projects, Energy independence and security investments
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Matomo Analytics, Cookiebot, Google Fonts, jQuery
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with opt-in/out
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo, Hubspot
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo, Hubspot
Marketing tools
Hubspot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses WordPress CMS with modern plugins for analytics and cookie consent.
  2. Cookie consent is implemented with Cookiebot, showing GDPR compliance.
  3. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found on homepage HTML.
  4. No terms of service page detected.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. Website is well-branded and professionally designed.
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  8. SSL is properly configured and HTTPS enforced.
  9. No DNSSEC enabled, which is a recommended improvement.
  10. External links mostly to trusted domains for fonts, analytics, and cookie consent.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS, utilizing modern web technologies including Google Fonts, jQuery, Matomo Analytics, and Cookiebot for cookie consent management. Hosting is provided by Hostpoint AG, a reputable Swiss hosting provider. The site demonstrates good mobile responsiveness and SEO optimization with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of analytics and consent scripts. Accessibility features are basic but present. No critical technical debt or outdated technologies were detected, indicating a well-maintained technical infrastructure.
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 energy-infrastructure-partners.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 energy-infrastructure-partners.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.