Skip to main content

Security report for et4.de

neusta destination one · Hospitality · Germany

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

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

neusta destination one operates a specialized B2B tourism data management platform primarily targeting tourism industry professionals in Germany and related markets. The platform offers a framework for managing tourism experiences and related data, accessible via a secure login portal. The website content is primarily in German with multi-language support, reflecting a regional focus with potential international reach. The business maintains a professional online presence with clear contact information and links to privacy and terms documents, supporting trust and compliance. Technically, the platform is built on legacy ASP.NET WebForms technology with jQuery and CKEditor integrations, indicating a mature but somewhat dated infrastructure. While HTTPS is enforced and cookie consent mechanisms are in place, the use of outdated JavaScript libraries and absence of modern security headers highlight areas for improvement in security posture. The lack of WHOIS data limits domain trust assessment, but the overall website professionalism and contact transparency suggest a legitimate business. Strategic recommendations include updating technology stack components, enhancing security headers, and conducting security audits to mitigate vulnerabilities and improve compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  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 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

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

Keep watching et4.de

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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
63

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 positions itself as a niche provider in the hospitality and tourism technology sector, offering data and experience management solutions. Its business model revolves around providing a SaaS platform for tourism stakeholders to manage content and experiences effectively. The presence of multi-language support and integration with external help and support portals indicates a customer-centric approach. The company maintains direct contact channels and provides support resources, enhancing customer engagement. The platform's legacy technology suggests a stable but potentially aging infrastructure, which may impact scalability and modernization efforts. No direct evidence of revenue streams or partnerships beyond the destination.one ecosystem was found, but the integration with Zoho SalesIQ and Google Analytics indicates active marketing and customer interaction strategies.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and includes form validation and cookie consent mechanisms, reflecting baseline security practices. However, the use of outdated jQuery versions with known vulnerabilities and the absence of critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security reduce the overall security posture. No visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies were found, indicating potential gaps in security governance. The legacy ASP.NET WebForms platform may also pose risks if not regularly updated. Recommendations include updating JavaScript libraries, implementing comprehensive security headers, enhancing form security with anti-CSRF tokens, and establishing clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure processes to strengthen security maturity and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Update all JavaScript libraries, especially jQuery, to the latest secure versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  2. Implement essential security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Conduct a thorough security audit of the legacy ASP.NET WebForms application to identify and remediate potential vulnerabilities.
  4. Establish and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response plan to improve security governance and transparency.
  5. Enhance cookie security by setting HttpOnly, Secure, and SameSite flags and ensure all forms include anti-CSRF tokens.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
neusta destination one
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
neusta destination one
Description
data: Teil des Tourismus-Frameworks von destination.one
Key services
Tourism data management, Experience framework platform, User access and content management
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
ASP.NET WebForms, jQuery 1.7.2 and 1.8.21, jQuery UI, Font Awesome 4.7.0, CKEditor, Google Analytics, Zoho SalesIQ
Frameworks
ASP.NET
Platforms
Windows Server (implied by ASP.NET WebForms)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Form validation on login inputs
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Zoho SalesIQ
Marketing tools
Zoho SalesIQ
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a login portal for a tourism data management platform
  2. Content is primarily in German with multi-language support
  3. No WHOIS data available, limiting domain trust assessment
  4. Uses legacy ASP.NET WebForms technology
  5. Includes cookie consent and privacy policy links
  6. No visible security headers detected
  7. Uses outdated JavaScript libraries
  8. No visible social media links on the login page
  9. Contact info includes physical address, phone, and email
  10. No signs of adult or questionable content
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on ASP.NET WebForms technology, utilizing jQuery (versions 1.7.2 and 1.8.21), jQuery UI, CKEditor, and Font Awesome 4.7.0. It integrates Google Analytics for traffic analysis and Zoho SalesIQ for customer engagement. The platform appears hosted on a Windows-based server environment. While the technology stack supports the platform's functionality, the use of outdated libraries and legacy frameworks suggests technical debt and potential security risks. Performance is moderate with basic mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic, with standard meta tags present but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Opportunities exist to modernize the tech stack, improve performance, and enhance accessibility and SEO for better user experience and search visibility.
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 et4.de. 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 et4.de.

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.