Skip to main content

Security report for eswagner.com

E.S. Wagner Company · Transportation · United States

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

E.S. Wagner Company is a large regional construction firm specializing in a broad range of infrastructure projects including highway construction, bridges, rail facilities, airport construction, and energy services. The company operates multiple physical locations across Ohio, South Carolina, and North Carolina, indicating a significant operational footprint. Their website presents a professional image with detailed service offerings and clear contact information, targeting clients in the transportation and energy sectors as well as potential employees. Technically, the website employs a modern but standard technology stack including Bootstrap, jQuery, Font Awesome, and Google Fonts. The site is mobile optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional design. However, performance is moderate and accessibility features are basic. The site uses Google Analytics for user tracking but lacks advanced privacy compliance mechanisms such as cookie consent banners or privacy policies. From a security perspective, the site lacks visible security headers and published security policies. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable concern, potentially indicating domain registration privacy or data unavailability, which impacts trustworthiness. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with better SSL configuration, security headers, and published policies. The overall risk assessment suggests the company operates a legitimate business with a professional web presence but should address compliance gaps and improve transparency around domain registration and security policies to enhance trust and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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: MSSQL

      Port 1433 (MSSQL) is publicly accessible - MSSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MSSQL 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

  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 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching eswagner.com

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
35
Average
45

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

E.S. Wagner Company holds a strong position in the regional construction market, focusing on infrastructure projects that serve transportation and energy sectors. Their extensive equipment fleet and multiple geographic locations provide competitive advantages in project execution capacity and regional reach. The business model centers on providing comprehensive construction services, including design-build and environmental services, targeting government and commercial clients. The website's career section indicates active recruitment, supporting growth and workforce development. The lack of visible partnerships or subsidiaries on the website suggests a primarily standalone operation. The company leverages standard web analytics but lacks advanced marketing or advertising integrations, indicating a focus on direct client relationships rather than broad digital marketing. Strategically, the company could benefit from enhancing digital trust signals such as certifications, privacy compliance, and security disclosures to strengthen client confidence and meet regulatory requirements.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is moderate. HTTPS usage is assumed but not explicitly confirmed in the provided data. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are important for mitigating common web attacks. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or security contact information is published, limiting transparency and readiness communication. The use of Google Analytics introduces moderate user tracking without visible consent mechanisms, which may expose the company to privacy compliance risks. No vulnerable or outdated libraries were identified in the HTML content. Overall, the site would benefit from implementing comprehensive security headers, publishing privacy and cookie policies, and establishing clear incident response contacts to improve security maturity and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and verify site-wide enforcement.
  2. Add and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements and implement cookie consent mechanisms.
  4. Establish and publish incident response contact information such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability assessments to identify and remediate potential risks.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
E.S. Wagner Company
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
E.S. Wagner Company
Description
E.S. Wagner Company is a construction company specializing in highway construction, bridges, structures, foundation systems, rail facilities, airport construction, design build, commercial and industrial site development, reservoirs and earthen containment systems, energy services, environmental services, water and waste facilities, and flood control systems.
Key services
Highway Construction, Bridges, Structures & Foundation Systems, Rail Facilities, Airport Construction, Design Build, Commercial & Industrial Site Development, Reservoirs & Earthen Containment Systems, Energy Services, Environmental Services, Water & Waste Facilities
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap 3.3.5, Font Awesome 4.4.0, Google Fonts (Roboto, Open Sans), Owl Carousel, Flexslider
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation.
  2. No privacy or cookie policy found, indicating compliance gaps.
  3. WHOIS data unavailable, raising domain legitimacy questions.
  4. Contact information is clearly presented with multiple physical locations.
  5. No visible security headers or advanced security policies.
  6. Uses common web technologies and analytics services.
  7. No forms detected on the homepage or main navigation for direct data collection.
  8. No social media links found in the provided HTML content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a conventional technology stack with Bootstrap 3.3.5, jQuery 2.1.4, Font Awesome 4.4.0, Owl Carousel, and Flexslider for UI components and animations. Google Fonts are used for typography. The site is mobile responsive and has a clear navigation structure. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple large background images and carousel scripts. No CMS or hosting provider information is discernible from the HTML. SEO optimization is basic with meta description and keywords present but no Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data detected. Accessibility features are minimal, with no ARIA roles or landmarks identified. The site does not contain forms on the homepage or main navigation, limiting data collection points. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could be modernized with updated frameworks, enhanced SEO, and improved accessibility.
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 eswagner.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 eswagner.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.