Skip to main content

Security report for ertex-solar.at

ertex solar · Energy · Austria

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ertex solar is a specialized company focused on building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV), offering innovative solar energy solutions integrated into architectural elements such as façades, balconies, and roofs. With a strong emphasis on aesthetics and energy transition, the company serves architects, developers, and environmentally conscious clients globally. The website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design, multilingual support, and comprehensive product information. Technically, the site runs on a modern WordPress stack with SEO and performance optimizations, hosted on OVHcloud. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and multiple security headers, though SSL/TLS protocol support requires enhancement. Privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned policies and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the domain and WHOIS data corroborate the legitimacy and consistency of the business claims.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

5 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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';…

  3. 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 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 ertex-solar.at

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
57
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
68

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

Ertex solar positions itself as a key player in the energy sector specializing in BIPV, leveraging decades of glass construction expertise. Its business model targets B2B clients in construction and architecture, offering tailored solar integration products. The company maintains a strong partnership ecosystem, notably with Soletanche Freyssinet, enhancing market reach and credibility. The website's content and social media presence support active engagement and brand awareness. Growth indicators include global project references and a comprehensive product portfolio. Revenue streams likely derive from product sales, consulting, and project execution services.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and multiple security headers implemented. Email security is reinforced by valid SPF and DMARC records with a reject policy, reducing spoofing risks. However, the absence of TLS 1.2 and 1.3 support and lack of OCSP stapling are notable weaknesses that could impact secure communications. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Privacy and cookie management comply with GDPR standards, indicating a strong data protection culture. Incident response and security policy disclosures are absent, suggesting room for improvement in transparency and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Enable and configure TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols to enhance SSL security.
  2. Implement OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation performance and security.
  3. Add CAA DNS records to restrict certificate issuance to authorized CAs.
  4. Consider enabling DNSSEC to protect DNS integrity and prevent spoofing.
  5. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.7.2 using the Fusion Builder theme and multiple plugins for SEO, GDPR compliance, and social media integration. Hosting is provided by OVHcloud, with PHP 8.1 powering backend processes. Performance is moderate with caching via WP Rocket and lazy loading images. The site is mobile optimized and accessible at a basic level. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin and proper meta tags including Open Graph and Twitter cards. Analytics are handled by Matomo and Google Tag Manager, with cookie consent managed by CT Ultimate GDPR plugin. The SSL certificate covers multiple related domains but lacks modern protocol support, which is a technical risk. Overall, the infrastructure is modern but could benefit from security and performance tuning.
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 ertex-solar.at. 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 ertex-solar.at.

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.