Skip to main content

Security report for enfco.eu

ENFCO · Non-profit · N/a

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

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

ENFCO is a European network of not-for-profit associations dedicated to in-house compliance professionals. It serves as a collaborative platform facilitating communication and cooperation among various national compliance associations across Europe. The website presents a professional image with detailed information about partner associations, reflecting a well-established network in the compliance sector. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern frameworks and includes consent management and CAPTCHA for form security. The security posture is solid with HTTPS and privacy compliance, though some security headers and policies could be improved. Overall, the site is trustworthy and serves its niche audience effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
33/ 100 · High
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

10 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

  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.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • 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

  3. 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"

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

Keep watching enfco.eu

This scan found 28 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
85
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
33
Average
43

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 · found on this site
  • 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

ENFCO occupies a niche market as a European-wide network for compliance professionals, leveraging partnerships with multiple national associations. Its business model is non-profit and community-driven, focusing on knowledge exchange and professional development. The presence of numerous partner associations across Europe indicates a broad and credible network. The website supports this ecosystem with contact points, social media, and event information. Revenue streams are likely membership fees and event sponsorships, typical for professional associations. The partnership ecosystem is strong, enhancing market positioning and growth potential.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses consent management tools, indicating awareness of privacy and security requirements. Contact forms are protected with CAPTCHA to mitigate spam. However, no explicit security policy or incident response contacts are published, which could be improved. The absence of security.txt or vulnerability disclosure pages limits transparency. No exposed sensitive data or known vulnerabilities were detected in the analysis. Security headers appear minimal and could be enhanced to improve defense-in-depth. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from formalized policies and disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a formal security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and mobile optimization to improve user experience across devices.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ENFCO
Description
ENFCO is a network of not-for-profit associations for in-house compliance professionals across Europe. The organisation facilitates the cooperation and communication between the participating associations and their incorporated professionals in the best spirit of a European Community, according to the network’s mission goals.
Key services
Facilitation of cooperation and communication between compliance associations, Networking platform for compliance professionals
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap 4, jQuery, ConsentManager, Google Tag Manager, Friendly Captcha, WPBakery Page Builder
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Consent management implemented
  • CAPTCHA on contact forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
ConsentManager
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 challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to EURid privacy protection.
  3. The site uses modern web technologies and consent management.
  4. Multiple reputable partner associations are listed with contact details.
  5. No security policy or incident response contact found on site.
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
  7. No terms of service page detected.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  9. Contact information includes emails, phone numbers, and contact form.
  10. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Bootstrap 4 framework and uses jQuery for client-side scripting. It integrates ConsentManager for GDPR-compliant cookie consent and Google Tag Manager for analytics. Friendly Captcha is used to secure contact forms. The site loads moderately fast and is mobile responsive with good SEO practices including meta tags and structured data. Some technical debt is noted in missing security headers and minor accessibility improvements. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-maintained, supporting the business goals effectively.
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 enfco.eu. 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 enfco.eu.

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.