Skip to main content

Security report for freedom.nl

Freedom · Telecommunications · Netherlands

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Freedom is a well-established Dutch internet service provider founded in 1999, offering Internet, TV, and VoIP services with a strong emphasis on privacy, security, and customer support. The company holds a reputable market position, having been recognized multiple times by the Dutch Consumers’ Association as the best Alles-in-1 provider. Their business model focuses on subscription-based services with added value such as free .nl domains, security software, and a dedicated helpdesk. Technically, the website is built on the Bolt CMS platform, uses Matomo for privacy-respecting analytics, and is hosted by a reputable Dutch registrar with DNSSEC enabled. Security posture is strong with HTTPS enforced and coordinated vulnerability disclosure policies in place, though improvements can be made by adding explicit security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and aligns well with its privacy-centric brand identity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
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 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. 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 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';…

  3. 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.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching freedom.nl

This scan found 17 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. See sample alerts.

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
75
Security headers
65
Email security
95
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
73

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

Freedom operates in the telecommunications sector targeting privacy-conscious consumers in the Netherlands. Its competitive advantage lies in its commitment to digital rights, privacy, and customer service rather than shareholder profit maximization. The company’s revenue streams come from internet, television, and telephony subscriptions, bundled with value-added services like security software and free domain names. The partnership ecosystem includes privacy advocacy groups such as Bits of Freedom. Growth indicators include multiple awards and a loyal customer base. The company’s operations reflect a socially responsible approach, investing in digital rights and education rather than aggressive profit strategies.

Security posture

Freedom demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS and DNSSEC enabled, secure form handling with CSRF tokens, and a public coordinated vulnerability disclosure policy. However, the absence of explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy and lack of a published security.txt file are areas for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The company’s privacy focus is reinforced by the use of Matomo analytics and inclusion of security software in customer packages. Incident response contact channels could be enhanced by providing dedicated security email addresses. Overall, Freedom’s security practices align well with GDPR and industry best practices but can benefit from incremental enhancements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability reporting.
  2. Add explicit HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Introduce a visible cookie consent banner to comply fully with privacy regulations.
  4. Disclose Data Protection Officer contact information to improve transparency and compliance.
  5. Enhance incident response readiness by providing dedicated security contact emails (e.g., security@ or abuse@).
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Freedom
Description
Freedom is an independent internet provider offering Internet, TV, and VoIP calling services with a focus on privacy, security, and customer support. They provide DSL and 1 Gbit/s fiber connections starting at €49 per month.
Key services
Internet (DSL and fiber), Television, VoIP calling, Freedom Mail, Subnet services
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Matomo Analytics, F-Secure security software (offered to customers), Bolt CMS
Frameworks
Bolt CMS
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • DNSSEC enabled
  • Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure policy
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure forms with CSRF tokens

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and no blocking detected.
  2. Strong emphasis on privacy, security, and customer service.
  3. Multiple trust and certification badges displayed.
  4. Clear contact information and support channels provided.
  5. Use of Matomo analytics aligns with privacy focus.
  6. No cookie consent banner detected, which could be improved.
  7. Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure policy publicly available.
  8. No explicit security headers detected in HTML content.
  9. Forms include CSRF tokens indicating secure form handling.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Bolt CMS platform, which is a modern and flexible CMS. It uses Matomo analytics, which aligns with the company’s privacy values. The site is well-optimized for mobile devices and demonstrates fast loading times. The use of DNSSEC and HTTPS indicates a secure hosting environment provided by team.blue nl B.V. The site includes secure form handling with CSRF tokens and preloads fonts for performance. There is no evidence of outdated or vulnerable libraries in the HTML content. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is good with skip links and ARIA labels. Overall, the technical implementation supports a robust, performant, and privacy-conscious user experience.
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 freedom.nl. 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 freedom.nl.

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.