Skip to main content

Security report for flaga.cz

Flaga s r.o. · Energy · Czech Republic

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

28/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Flaga s r.o. is a mature Czech energy company specializing in the distribution of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in cylinders, tanks, and for automotive use. The company has a strong market presence supported by a 27-year domain age and recognized safety certifications. Their website targets both corporate and individual customers in the Czech Republic and Poland, offering a range of LPG products and customer services including electronic invoicing. Technically, the website is built on Joomla CMS with PHP 8.3.3 backend and jQuery frontend, integrating Google Tag Manager and OneTrust for analytics and cookie consent. However, the site lacks HTTPS, which is a critical security deficiency. Security headers are partially implemented but the absence of SSL/TLS and modern protocols significantly weakens the security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with comprehensive policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the business credibility is solid, but the technical and security implementations require urgent improvements to meet modern standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

9 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  4. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

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

Keep watching flaga.cz

This scan found 18 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
30
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
0
Average
28

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 · found on this site
  • 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 company operates in the energy sector focusing on LPG supply, serving a diverse customer base including households, agriculture, industry, and automotive sectors. Their business model revolves around product distribution and customer service with a focus on safety and quality. The website reflects a consistent brand image and provides transparent contact information, enhancing trust. The partnership with safety certification entities and use of recognized cookie consent tools indicate a commitment to compliance and customer trust. Growth potential exists through digital channels, but technical modernization and security enhancements are needed to support scalability and customer confidence.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS and valid SSL certificates, exposing users to potential interception and data integrity risks. The server reveals PHP version information, increasing fingerprinting risk. No modern TLS protocols or strong cipher suites are enabled, and session security features like OCSP stapling and session resumption are missing. While some security headers like HSTS are present, they are ineffective without HTTPS. The site uses secure cookie flags but lacks a comprehensive security policy or incident response contact information. These gaps expose the business to compliance risks and potential cyber threats.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and configure strong cipher suites.
  3. Remove or mask server version headers to reduce information leakage.
  4. Enhance HSTS policy to include subdomains and preload directives.
  5. Establish and publish a formal security policy and incident response contact channels.
  6. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and CMS components to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  7. Improve website performance metrics and accessibility features for better user experience.
  8. Maintain and update privacy and cookie policies to ensure ongoing GDPR compliance.
  9. Consider adding terms of service and data protection officer contact information.
  10. Increase transparency on certifications and trust indicators to strengthen market position.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Flaga s r.o.
Technical notes

Notes

The website runs on a PHP 8.3.3 backend with Joomla CMS and uses jQuery 3.7.1 on the frontend. It integrates Google Tag Manager for analytics and OneTrust for cookie consent management. The server is nginx 1.20.1 hosted on IP 51.77.53.228 with Azure DNS name servers. Performance data is missing, indicating potential monitoring gaps. The site lacks HTTPS, which is a critical technical deficiency. The HTML content is well structured with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data for SEO. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility is basic. The site uses external resources from trusted domains but could improve caching and session management. Overall, the technical stack is modern but requires urgent security upgrades and performance monitoring.
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 flaga.cz. 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 flaga.cz.

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.