Skip to main content

Security report for exerp.com

Exerp · Information technology and services · Denmark

Partial score · DNS & email only

73/100

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

Scanned

5 of 7 checks could not complete. The site may be unreachable or blocking automated scans, so the results below cover only what could be checked. Try a rescan later.

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
Not assessed
GDPR outside view
Not assessed

Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.

Priority findings

No critical or high findings in the checks that completed. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Medium

      DMARC not enforcing

      DMARC policy is set to "none"

      What to do: Gradually move to "quarantine" then "reject" policy

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

  2. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035

Keep watching exerp.com

Only DNS and email could be checked this time. Monitoring re-checks every day and emails you when something material changes.

Daily monitoring

€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.

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

Email security
65
DNS health
80
Average
73

Not counted

  • SSL/TLS: did not complete in this scan.
  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • Network security: did not complete in this scan.
  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 blocked nature of the website and absence of business-related content, no reliable business intelligence can be derived. There are no visible indications of company name, services, target audience, or market positioning. The domain's lack of WHOIS data further complicates any assessment of legitimacy or operational status. No partnerships or related domains are identifiable from the available data.

Security posture

The security posture is characterized primarily by the presence of a proof-of-work captcha challenge, which is a strong indicator of active security controls to mitigate automated access or abuse. However, no security headers or SSL configuration details are available to assess further security best practices. The absence of privacy policies, cookie consent mechanisms, and contact information for incident response reduces compliance and transparency. The domain's unregistered or privacy-protected status raises concerns about legitimacy and accountability.

Recommendations

  1. Ensure the domain is properly registered and WHOIS information is accurate and publicly available to improve trust.
  2. Provide accessible website content with clear business, contact, and policy information to enhance credibility.
  3. Implement and publish privacy and cookie policies compliant with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Add security headers and ensure HTTPS with valid SSL certificates to strengthen security posture.
  5. Consider reducing or customizing WAF challenge mechanisms to allow legitimate user access and improve user experience.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Page is a robot challenge screen with proof-of-work captcha indicating a WAF or security challenge blocking access to normal content. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Web Crypto API, SHA1, Base64 encoding
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of cryptographic challenge (proof-of-work captcha)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to a robot challenge screen.
  2. No meaningful business or contact information is available on the page.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies detected.
  4. No forms or data collection fields present.
  5. No social media or external business links found except CDN domain.
  6. Technical content is limited to cryptographic proof-of-work captcha scripts.
  7. No security headers or SSL details available from provided data.
  8. WHOIS data is missing, indicating domain may be unregistered or privacy protected.
  9. Overall website quality and trust indicators are very low due to blocked content.
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 exerp.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 exerp.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.