Skip to main content

Security report for forcitgroup.com

FORCIT Group · Energy · Finland

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

FORCIT Group is a well-established Finnish company specializing in explosives, environmental consulting, and defence technologies, with a strong Nordic market presence. The website reflects a mature business with clear branding, comprehensive service descriptions, and multiple subsidiary domains. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern analytics and tracking tools, hosted on Azure DNS infrastructure. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer lock enabled, though improvements are needed in DNS security and security headers. Privacy compliance is partial, lacking cookie consent mechanisms despite active tracking. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but could enhance transparency and security policies to align with best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…
  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching forcitgroup.com

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
85
Security headers
35
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
61

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention forcitgroup.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for forcitgroup.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

FORCIT Group operates primarily in the energy sector focusing on explosives and defence technologies, targeting industrial and governmental clients in Finland, Sweden, and Norway. The company leverages a multi-domain strategy for its subsidiaries, indicating a diversified business model. The presence of annual and sustainability reports suggests transparency and commitment to corporate responsibility. The website's content and structure support a strong market position as a leading Nordic partner for demanding operations. Growth indicators include recent news about significant investments and sustainability initiatives. The partnership ecosystem includes multiple related domains and external newsrooms, enhancing credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and domain transfer protection. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents gaps that could be exploited. No visible incident response or security policy documentation reduces transparency and preparedness perception. The use of third-party analytics without explicit cookie consent may expose the company to GDPR compliance risks. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the provided content. Overall, the security posture is adequate but requires enhancements to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to strengthen DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement and display a comprehensive cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish detailed security and incident response policies to improve transparency and preparedness.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to harden the website against common attacks.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities and ensure compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
OY FORCIT AB
Registration number
0103189-6
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
FORCIT Group
Description
FORCIT Group is a comprehensive service company operating in the explosives field since 1893. Their expertise ranges from blasting and charging services and know-how to environmental impact management and advanced insensitive munitions defence technologies. Main market area includes Finland, Sweden, and Norway with selected projects worldwide.
Key services
Blasting and charging services, Environmental impact management, Insensitive munitions defence technologies
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.6.2, jQuery, Bootstrap Icons, Google Analytics (gtag.js), Matomo Analytics, AOS (Animate On Scroll)
Frameworks
Understrap Child Theme, WPML (Multilingual CMS)
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Matomo Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo Analytics
Marketing tools
MonsterInsights Google Analytics plugin
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Content is comprehensive about company services and values.
  3. No visible forms collecting personal data on homepage.
  4. No explicit cookie consent banner found despite tracking scripts.
  5. No visible security or incident response policies published.
  6. Multiple related domains for subsidiaries and business units linked.
  7. Use of modern analytics and tracking tools without explicit user opt-in.
  8. No DNSSEC enabled which is a minor security gap.
  9. SSL is properly configured and enforced.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern WordPress CMS with a child theme based on Understrap, integrating WPML for multilingual support. It employs jQuery, Bootstrap Icons, and AOS for UI enhancements. Analytics are handled via Google Analytics (gtag.js) and Matomo, indicating a dual tracking approach. Hosting is supported by Azure DNS infrastructure, suggesting reliable uptime and performance. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in loading speed and accessibility. No broken elements or errors were detected in the HTML content. Technical debt appears low, but enabling DNSSEC and security headers would modernize the security posture further.
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 forcitgroup.com. 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 forcitgroup.com.

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.