Skip to main content

Security report for fleet-interface.de

Fleet Interface · Transportation · N/A

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Email security.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Fleet Interface appears to be a small transportation-related business with a website built on the React framework and hosted on Amazon AWS. The site is minimalistic with no visible contact information, privacy policies, or terms of service, indicating a basic digital presence. The technical infrastructure shows modern JavaScript usage but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. Security headers are implemented well, but the SSL configuration is incomplete as no TLS protocols are enabled, which is a critical issue. There is no evidence of GDPR compliance or user consent mechanisms. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires significant improvements in SSL configuration and compliance documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 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

6 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. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

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

Keep watching fleet-interface.de

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
95
Security headers
80
Email security
55
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
15
Average
72

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 company operates in the transportation sector with a focus on fleet management or related services, inferred from the domain and site title. The lack of detailed business information, contact data, or marketing content limits insight into market positioning or revenue streams. The site does not reveal partnerships or subsidiaries. The business model and target audience are not explicitly stated, suggesting a niche or internal-facing application. Growth indicators and strategic partnerships are not discernible from the website content.

Security posture

The website implements several key security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS with includeSubDomains, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are positive indicators of security awareness. However, the SSL certificate, while valid, does not support any TLS versions, which is a critical vulnerability that could expose users to interception or downgrade attacks. DNSSEC and CAA records are not enabled, reducing domain-level security. There is no published incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy, and no data protection officer contact is provided, indicating gaps in compliance and security governance.

Recommendations

  1. Enable and configure TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols on the web server to secure communications.
  2. Implement DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance domain security and prevent certificate misuse.
  3. Publish comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  4. Add a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  5. Develop and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using React with deferred JavaScript loading, indicating a modern single-page application approach. Hosting is on Amazon AWS with multiple A records for redundancy. Performance metrics indicate fast load times, though no resource or page size data was available. The site lacks SEO metadata such as Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data, limiting search engine visibility. Accessibility and mobile optimization are basic, with no advanced features detected. The SSL configuration is incomplete, lacking enabled TLS protocols, which poses a significant risk. No CMS or third-party analytics tools are detected, suggesting a custom or minimalistic deployment.
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 fleet-interface.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 fleet-interface.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.