Skip to main content

Security report for fi.se

Finansinspektionen · Finance · Sweden

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

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Finansinspektionen is the Swedish financial supervisory authority responsible for ensuring a stable financial system, high consumer protection, and sustainable development in the financial sector. The website serves as an official government portal providing regulatory information, reports, warnings, and consumer guidance. It targets the general public, financial institutions, and consumers with a focus on transparency and public service. The domain is well-established since 1994, reinforcing its credibility and authority. Technically, the website uses a modern but straightforward technology stack including jQuery and FontAwesome, with custom JavaScript bundles and CSS for styling. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices evident in meta tags and structured navigation. Hosting details are not explicit, but the registrar is a reputable Swedish provider. Performance is moderate, suitable for a government informational site. From a security perspective, HTTPS is used, but DNSSEC is not enabled, and no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. The site lacks a dedicated security policy or incident response contact information, which could be improved. Privacy compliance is good with clear privacy and cookie policies, though no explicit consent mechanism was detected. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and well-aligned with its role as a government financial regulator. Recommendations include enabling DNSSEC, adding security headers, and publishing a security.txt file to enhance security posture and transparency.

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 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: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google APIs

      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

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

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

Keep watching fi.se

This scan found 15 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
95
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
60

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

Finansinspektionen holds a critical position as Sweden's financial supervisory authority, overseeing banks, insurance companies, and financial markets to ensure stability and consumer protection. Its business model is non-commercial, funded by the government, focusing on regulation, supervision, and public communication. The website supports this mission by providing reports, warnings, and educational content. The organization maintains a strong partnership ecosystem through official channels and social media. Growth indicators include ongoing investigations and publications. The site reflects a mature, authoritative presence with consistent branding and high professionalism.

Security posture

The security posture is solid but could be enhanced. HTTPS is enforced, and no sensitive data leaks or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers like Content Security Policy or HSTS reduces the overall security robustness. There is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanism, which is a gap in transparency and readiness. The site does not expose forms that collect sensitive personal data beyond search inputs, reducing attack surface. Compliance with GDPR is implied through privacy policies but could be more explicit. Overall, the site is secure for informational purposes but would benefit from modern security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Publish a security.txt file to provide clear vulnerability disclosure and incident response contacts.
  4. Add explicit cookie consent mechanisms to enhance privacy compliance and user trust.
  5. Consider adding a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Finansinspektionen
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Finansinspektionen
Description
Vi arbetar för ett stabilt finansiellt system, ett högt skydd för konsumenter och en hållbar utveckling.
Key services
Financial market supervision, Consumer protection, Sustainability in finance, Regulatory publications and reports, Registries and warnings
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.6.0, jQuery UI 1.13, FontAwesome, Custom JavaScript bundles, CSS stylesheets
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS implied by domain usage (https://fi.se/)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well maintained.
  2. Content is comprehensive and relevant to financial supervision and consumer protection.
  3. No signs of malicious or suspicious activity.
  4. Social media presence is official and consistent.
  5. No explicit privacy or security policy pages beyond general website information.
  6. No visible contact emails or phone numbers in the HTML content.
  7. No forms collecting personal data except search forms with minimal input.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a classic web technology stack with jQuery and FontAwesome, supported by custom JavaScript and CSS bundles. The HTML is well-structured with meta tags for SEO and responsive design elements for mobile optimization. No CMS is explicitly detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. Hosting is via a Swedish registrar, Loopia AB, but no further hosting details are available. Performance is moderate, suitable for a government site with rich content and images. Accessibility features are present, improving usability for diverse users. Technical risks are minimal but could be reduced further by modernizing security configurations and enabling DNSSEC.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 70/100 +17Medium29 findingsView report
  2. 53/100Medium27 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with fi.se. 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 fi.se.

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.