Skip to main content

Security report for eurofins.com

Eurofins Scientific · Healthcare · N/a

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Eurofins Scientific operates a comprehensive global network of laboratory testing services specializing in food, environment, pharmaceutical product testing, and agroscience CRO services. With approximately 63,000 employees and over 950 laboratories across 60 countries, Eurofins is a world leader in its sector, offering more than 200,000 analytical methods. The website reflects this extensive business scope with detailed service offerings and a strong global presence. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools, but suffers from critical SSL/TLS configuration issues that undermine its security posture. Security headers are implemented, but the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent significant vulnerabilities. Privacy compliance is well addressed with cookie consent mechanisms and privacy policies in place. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but requires urgent remediation of its SSL/TLS issues to ensure secure user interactions.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Cloudflare

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching eurofins.com

This scan found 13 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
0
Security headers
70
Email security
50
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
15
Average
54

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

Eurofins Scientific holds a dominant market position in laboratory testing and CRO services, targeting businesses requiring analytical testing in healthcare, food safety, environment, and related industries. Its business model is service-oriented, leveraging a vast global laboratory network. The company demonstrates strong branding consistency and trust indicators such as ISO certifications and corporate sustainability initiatives. The website supports its business intelligence with detailed service descriptions, investor relations, and global location information. The absence of direct contact emails or phone numbers suggests a preference for controlled contact via forms and regional sites. The extensive country-specific domains indicate a decentralized but coordinated global strategy.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weakened by the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which are critical for secure communications. While security headers like HSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options are present, their effectiveness is limited without proper HTTPS enforcement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are publicly available, which could hinder timely security issue reporting. The site uses modern analytics and cookie consent tools, indicating awareness of privacy and security best practices. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and publication of security policies are recommended to enhance security maturity.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure user data transmission.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable outdated or insecure protocols.
  3. Activate HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload options to enforce HTTPS.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve security and performance.
  5. Publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting.
  6. Consider adding explicit incident response contact channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  7. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience.
  8. Provide direct contact information such as verified company emails and phone numbers for transparency.
Technical notes

Notes

The website employs a modern JavaScript stack including jQuery 3.6.1, Google Tag Manager, OneTrust for cookie consent, and Plausible Analytics for privacy-focused tracking. The hosting IP suggests AWS infrastructure. Performance metrics are not available, but the site includes mobile optimization and responsive design elements. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. However, the invalid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent significant technical debt and security risk. The site lacks a detected CMS, indicating a custom or proprietary platform. Technical improvements should focus on security hardening and performance optimization.
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 eurofins.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 eurofins.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.