Skip to main content

Security report for fh-guestrow.de

Other · N/a

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

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website fh-guestrow.de currently serves only a 404 Not Found error page with minimal HTML content and no business or security-related information. The domain is registered and active with netcup name servers, but the website itself is inaccessible and lacks any meaningful content or metadata. There are no privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies, no contact information, and no visible security measures such as HTTPS or security headers. This indicates either a misconfigured or inactive website. From a technical perspective, the site does not utilize any detectable frameworks, CMS, or analytics tools. The hosting provider is netcup, but no further infrastructure details are available. The lack of content and metadata results in poor SEO, accessibility, and user experience. Security posture is minimal with no evidence of HTTPS or security best practices. The WHOIS data shows a consistent domain registration with no privacy protection, but the lack of website content reduces the domain's trustworthiness. No suspicious patterns were detected in the WHOIS data. Overall, the site presents a high risk due to its inaccessibility and lack of transparency. Strategic recommendations include fixing the 404 error to restore website accessibility, implementing HTTPS with proper SSL certificates, adding privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR, providing clear contact and business information, and adopting security best practices such as security headers and incident response contacts.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

      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 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 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. 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 fh-guestrow.de

This scan found 22 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
77
Security headers
75
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
68

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

Due to the absence of any business-related content or metadata on the website, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. The domain name suggests a possible affiliation with a location or institution (Guestrow), but no company name, services, or market positioning is evident. There are no indications of target customer segments, revenue streams, or partnerships. The domain appears to be either unused or under construction.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is currently very weak. The site lacks HTTPS, security headers, and any visible security policies or incident response information. No forms or input fields are present to assess secure data handling. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The WHOIS data does not show privacy protection, which is consistent with a transparent registration but does not compensate for the lack of website security. Overall, the site is vulnerable to trust and compliance issues.

Recommendations

  1. Restore website content to eliminate the 404 Not Found error.
  2. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure communications.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure GDPR compliance.
  4. Publish clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for user support and incident response.
  5. Adopt security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

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 is currently inaccessible with a 404 Not Found error.
  2. No metadata beyond basic charset and robots noindex directives.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No contact information or forms present.
  5. No scripts, external links, or social media links detected.
  6. No security headers or SSL configuration details available.
  7. WHOIS data shows domain is active with netcup name servers.
  8. No business or branding information available on the page.
  9. No advertising or analytics technologies detected.
  10. Content safety is safe due to lack of content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website currently serves a minimal HTML error page with no scripts, external resources, or metadata beyond charset and robots noindex directives. No CMS or frameworks are detected. Hosting is provided by netcup as indicated by the DNS name servers. The site lacks SEO optimization, accessibility features, and mobile responsiveness. Performance cannot be fully assessed due to lack of content but is likely moderate given the minimal page size. The technical debt is high as the site is non-functional and requires significant remediation to become operational.
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 fh-guestrow.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 fh-guestrow.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.