Skip to main content

Security report for epfif.fr

EPFIF · Real Estate · France

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

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

EPF Île-de-France (EPFIF) is a public land operator serving the Île-de-France region, focusing on mobilizing land to support housing development and economic growth. It plays a key role in requalifying degraded housing and supporting urban projects, positioning itself as a major regional public entity. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence with comprehensive content targeting local authorities and stakeholders in urban development. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins and SEO tools, delivering moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks advanced security headers and formal incident response disclosures. WHOIS data is unavailable, which slightly reduces domain trustworthiness, but the official social media presence and regulatory publications support legitimacy. Overall, the site is well-maintained, GDPR compliant, and serves its public mission effectively.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of epfif.fr. View the latest report

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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, 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 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';…

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

Keep watching epfif.fr

This scan found 22 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
70
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
25
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

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 epfif.fr, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
4
Employees
0
Customers
3
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
0%

3 subdomains 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 epfif.fr.

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 organization operates in the real estate and government sectors, providing essential public services related to land management and housing in Île-de-France. Its business model is based on public funding and strategic land acquisitions to facilitate urban development. The presence of dedicated partner sites and multiple official communication channels indicates a well-established network. Growth indicators include recent publications and active social media engagement. The company targets local governments, urban planners, and public stakeholders, emphasizing social and environmental responsibility. No parent or subsidiary companies were identified, suggesting an independent public entity.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and implements cookie consent mechanisms, indicating baseline security and privacy awareness. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and lack of a security.txt file or incident response contact reduce its security maturity. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the HTML content. The site uses reputable WordPress plugins but should maintain vigilance on plugin updates to avoid vulnerabilities. Overall, the security posture is moderate, suitable for a public informational site but with room for improvement in formal security policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a security.txt file to provide a clear vulnerability disclosure channel and improve transparency.
  3. Develop and publish an incident response policy with dedicated contact information for security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate risks from outdated components.
  5. Enhance website accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
EPFIF
Description
EPF Ile-de-France-EPFIF est l'opérateur public foncier des collectivités franciliennes. Il contribue à développer l'offre de logements et au soutien du développement économique.
Key services
Mobilisation foncière, Lutte contre l’habitat indigne, Requalification des copropriétés dégradées, Soutien au développement économique, Cartographie des interventions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, jQuery 3.7.1, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Yoast SEO plugin, Custom Twitter Feeds plugin, WP MegaMenu plugin, Ninja Forms plugin, Cookie Notice plugin
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected
  3. WHOIS data unavailable, limiting domain trust analysis
  4. Strong presence of official social media and regulatory publications
  5. Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented and GDPR compliant
  6. No explicit security headers detected in provided data
  7. Use of modern WordPress plugins and SEO tools
  8. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data in HTML content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1, leveraging popular plugins such as Yoast SEO for search optimization, Custom Twitter Feeds for social integration, and WP MegaMenu for navigation. It uses jQuery 3.7.1 and Google Analytics for tracking. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and includes accessibility basics. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in load speed and caching. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified. The site uses modern SEO practices with meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for enhanced search engine visibility. Technical risks include dependency on multiple third-party plugins which require regular maintenance to avoid vulnerabilities.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 60/100Medium29 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with epfif.fr. 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 epfif.fr.

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.