Skip to main content

Security report for ffl.si

Other · Slovenia

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.ffl.si appears to represent a small business entity based in Slovenia, with domain registration dating back to 2008. The site content is minimal and primarily in Slovenian, with no visible privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies. The technical infrastructure includes Cloudflare DNS and CDN services, indicating some level of security and performance optimization. However, the website lacks modern security headers and explicit privacy compliance indicators. No contact information or social media presence is evident from the provided data, limiting business credibility and user trust. Overall, the site demonstrates a basic digital presence with room for significant improvement in content richness, security posture, and compliance transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
33/ 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

7 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 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 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';…

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

Keep watching ffl.si

This scan found 23 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
55
Email security
55
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
33
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 business behind www.ffl.si is likely a small-scale operation given the limited online footprint and minimal content. The domain age suggests an established presence, but the lack of detailed business information, contact details, and policies reduces transparency. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries. The business model and target audience cannot be confidently determined from the available data. The absence of marketing or analytics tools suggests limited digital marketing efforts. Strategic growth could benefit from enhanced online presence, clearer business information, and compliance documentation.

Security posture

The website benefits from Cloudflare's DNS and CDN services, which provide baseline protection and performance benefits. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options is a notable gap. No forms or input fields were detected, reducing immediate risk from input-based attacks, but also limiting user engagement. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information, which is a compliance and security best practice gap. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved with standard security headers and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to enhance GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve security posture.
  3. Provide clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity and incident readiness.
  5. Enhance website content quality and navigation to improve user experience and SEO performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Cloudflare, CSS3, HTML5
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Uses Cloudflare DNS and CDN

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 minimal and truncated, limiting detailed analysis.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. No contact information such as emails or phone numbers explicitly found.
  4. No forms detected in the provided HTML content.
  5. No social media links or external marketing/analytics scripts detected.
  6. Website uses Cloudflare nameservers indicating CDN and security services.
  7. WHOIS data shows domain registered since 2008 with no privacy protection.
  8. Website appears to be in Slovenian language based on HTML lang attribute.
  9. No explicit security headers detected in the provided data.
  10. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure or incident response information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses Cloudflare for DNS and CDN, which is a positive indicator for performance and security. The HTML content is valid but minimal, with extensive CSS styles but limited visible content. No CMS or major JavaScript frameworks were detected, suggesting a static or custom-built site. Mobile optimization is basic, and accessibility features are minimal. SEO optimization is also basic due to lack of meta tags and structured data. Performance is moderate but could benefit from content enrichment and optimization. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities exist to improve user engagement and security.
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 ffl.si. 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 ffl.si.

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.