Skip to main content

Security report for forpsi.systems

FORPSI · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

FORPSI operates as a technology service provider specializing in datacenter, connectivity, domain, webhosting, email, serverhosting, cloud services, and customer support. The website analyzed is a status page indicating all systems are operational, targeting customers and stakeholders who require real-time service status updates. The company appears to have a medium-sized operation with a consistent brand presence and a focus on IT infrastructure services. Technical infrastructure includes modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery and Semantic UI, with Google Tag Manager integrated for analytics. The website is mobile optimized and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional design. Security posture is moderate; HTTPS is implied but no explicit security headers were detected in the HTML source. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies or consent mechanisms. WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is typical for technology service providers, but limits verification of registrant details. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but could improve in privacy and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

7 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 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching forpsi.systems

This scan found 20 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
82
Security headers
60
Email security
55
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
57

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

FORPSI positions itself as a comprehensive IT service provider with offerings spanning datacenter operations, connectivity, domain registration and DNS management, shared webhosting, email services, server hosting, and cloud solutions. The business model is service-oriented, targeting enterprises and individuals requiring reliable IT infrastructure. The presence of a dedicated status page indicates a mature operational approach emphasizing transparency and customer communication. The integration of Google Tag Manager suggests active marketing and analytics efforts. However, the lack of visible contact information, privacy policies, and certifications may limit trust for new customers. The company likely operates in a competitive technology sector with a focus on infrastructure services. No parent or subsidiary relationships were identified from the data provided.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is moderate. The site uses HTTPS, which is mandatory for secure communications. However, no explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or X-Content-Type-Options were detected, which are recommended best practices to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. The absence of privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms indicates potential compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. No forms collecting sensitive user data were found, reducing immediate risk exposure. WHOIS data is privacy protected, which is common but limits transparency. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the HTML content or scripts. Incident response contact information is not provided, which could hinder timely reporting and resolution of security issues. Overall, the site demonstrates basic security hygiene but would benefit from enhanced security controls and compliance documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance and consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve protection against common attacks.
  3. Provide clear contact information for security incidents, including an abuse or security email address.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet recognized standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Regularly review and update WHOIS information to ensure consistency and transparency where possible.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
FORPSI
Description
Current status of FORPSI services
Key services
Datacenter services, Connectivity, Domain and DNS services, Shared webhosting, E-mail services, Serverhosting services, Cloud services, Customer support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.5.1, Semantic UI, Google Tag Manager
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage implied by URL
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • No vulnerable libraries detected in scripts

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a status page for FORPSI services showing all systems operational
  2. No WHOIS data publicly available, likely privacy protected
  3. No contact or policy pages detected in the provided HTML
  4. Uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking
  5. No signs of adult or questionable content
  6. No visible security headers in HTML source
  7. No forms collecting user data except a status refresh form with hidden fields
Technical notes

Notes

The website employs a modern front-end technology stack including jQuery 3.5.1 and Semantic UI for UI components and styling. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and marketing tracking. The site is mobile responsive and has a clear, structured layout with a refresh meta tag for real-time status updates. No CMS or backend platform was identified from the HTML content. Performance appears moderate with no obvious delays or errors in the page source. The site lacks advanced SEO features such as Open Graph tags or JSON-LD structured data, limiting social media integration and search engine optimization. No hosting provider information was discernible from the content. The technical setup is functional but could be improved with enhanced SEO, security headers, and privacy compliance features.
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 forpsi.systems. 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 forpsi.systems.

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.