Skip to main content

Security report for eogp.dk

Enemærke & Petersen · Real Estate · Denmark

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Enemærke & Petersen is a well-established Danish construction company specializing in renovation and new construction of public and private housing, institutions, and commercial buildings across Denmark. The company positions itself as a leading social contractor in the Danish market, with a domain age dating back to 1998, reflecting a mature business presence. The website is professionally designed using WordPress CMS, incorporating modern SEO practices and cookie consent management via Cookiebot, indicating a reasonable level of digital maturity. However, direct contact information such as emails and phone numbers are not explicitly visible, relying mainly on embedded contact forms integrated through a partner recruiting platform. Security-wise, the site uses HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms but lacks visible security headers and published security policies, which could be improved to enhance trust and compliance. Overall, the website is safe, professional, and trustworthy, with room for improvement in privacy transparency and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 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

5 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. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching eogp.dk

This scan found 20 issues across 5 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
57
Security headers
25
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
100
Average
73

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 primarily in the real estate and construction sectors, targeting clients needing social and private housing renovation and new builds. Its business model is service-oriented as a main and total contractor, with a strong market position in Denmark. The website's integration with Mindkey recruiting services suggests active talent acquisition efforts. The absence of direct contact details may indicate a preference for controlled communication channels. The company leverages SEO and structured data to maintain visibility and credibility. No certifications or compliance frameworks are explicitly mentioned, which could be an area for future enhancement to strengthen market trust.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture with HTTPS enabled and cookie consent mechanisms in place. However, the lack of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options reduces its defense-in-depth. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is published, which limits transparency and readiness perception. The use of third-party recruiting and consent platforms introduces dependencies that should be monitored for security. Overall, the site is not exposed to obvious vulnerabilities but would benefit from enhanced security controls and published policies to meet higher compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve transparency and compliance.
  3. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to harden the website against common attacks.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to demonstrate preparedness and encourage responsible vulnerability reporting.
  5. Improve accessibility features to meet compliance and enhance user experience for all visitors.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Enemærke & Petersen
Description
Enemærke & Petersen er Danmarks sociale entreprenør, som renoverer og bygger nye almene og private boliger, institutioner og erhverv i hele landet.
Key services
Renovation of public and private housing, Construction of new housing, Institutional and commercial building projects
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.7.2, jQuery, Yoast SEO plugin, Cookiebot, Google Tag Manager, Mindkey recruiting integration
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent management via Cookiebot
  • Google Tag Manager used with consent blocking mode

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional corporate site for a Danish construction company
  2. Uses WordPress CMS with modern SEO and cookie consent tools
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected
  4. Contact information is primarily via embedded forms; no direct emails or phone numbers found in visible content
  5. Good use of structured data and Open Graph metadata for SEO and social sharing
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected
  8. Cookie consent is implemented with Cookiebot and blocking mode enabled
  9. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and marketing
  10. No DNSSEC enabled on domain
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.7.2 with common plugins such as Yoast SEO and Cookiebot for SEO and privacy compliance. It uses jQuery and integrates with external recruiting services via Mindkey. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Performance is moderate with no explicit hosting provider identified. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance optimizations. The use of Google Tag Manager is well integrated with consent blocking to respect user privacy choices.
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 eogp.dk. 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 eogp.dk.

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.