Skip to main content

Security report for ergoclothing.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website at ergoclothing.com/lander currently serves as a minimal parking or placeholder page with very limited content. There is no visible business information, contact details, or user engagement features. The domain is registered with GoDaddy since 2009, indicating a long-standing registration, but the website itself lacks substantive content or branding. Technically, the site uses basic JavaScript and external scripts related to parking lander services and Google Adsense advertising. There is no evidence of a content management system or advanced frameworks. Security posture is weak with no DNSSEC, no security headers, and minimal SSL configuration information. Privacy and compliance policies are absent, which is a significant gap for user trust and regulatory adherence. Overall, the site appears inactive or under development, limiting its business credibility and user trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 100 · Medium
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

8 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching ergoclothing.com

This scan found 23 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
77
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
64

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

Due to the lack of visible business content, it is difficult to ascertain the company's market position, business model, or target audience. The domain name suggests a clothing-related business, but no supporting information is present on the page. There are no indications of partnerships, certifications, or strategic business operations. The domain's age suggests the business may have existed previously or is planned for future use. No revenue streams or customer engagement mechanisms are evident.

Security posture

The security posture is minimal and lacks best practices. The absence of DNSSEC and security headers exposes the domain to potential DNS spoofing and clickjacking risks. The SSL configuration is basic, and no forms or inputs are present to assess secure data handling. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The site does not demonstrate compliance with GDPR or other privacy regulations, increasing risk exposure. Overall, the security maturity is low, and improvements are necessary to protect users and the business.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing attacks.
  2. Implement essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Develop and publish privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and build user trust.
  4. Add clear contact information and incident response channels to improve transparency and support.
  5. Consider developing substantive website content and improving SEO and accessibility to enhance business credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Platforms
WSIMG Parking Lander
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
55/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is minimal and appears to be a parking or placeholder page.
  2. No visible business or contact information on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No forms or user input fields detected.
  5. External scripts include Google Adsense and a parking lander script.
  6. No social media links or emails found.
  7. Domain is registered with GoDaddy since 2009 and is active until 2026.
  8. No DNSSEC enabled, no security headers detected.
  9. Website lacks SEO and accessibility features.
  10. No evidence of security or compliance frameworks implemented.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with minimal HTML and JavaScript, relying on external scripts for parking lander functionality and Google Adsense advertising. There is no detected CMS or advanced framework. Hosting is via GoDaddy, with domain control name servers ns21 and ns22.domaincontrol.com. Performance is moderate given the minimal content, but mobile optimization and accessibility are basic at best. SEO optimization is poor due to lack of meta tags and structured data. The technical infrastructure is simple but lacks modern security and compliance features.
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 ergoclothing.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 ergoclothing.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.