Skip to main content

Security report for ftcg.co.uk

FT Construction Group · Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

FT Construction Group is a medium-sized, privately owned construction group based in the North East of England, comprising multiple subsidiary companies specializing in construction projects and metalwork fabrication. The group targets both private and public sector clients with project values ranging from small to multi-million pounds. Their website is professionally designed using WordPress and the Divi theme, providing clear navigation and promoting their subsidiaries effectively. The technical infrastructure is modern and includes standard web technologies and cookie consent mechanisms, indicating a reasonable level of digital maturity. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, but lacks visible advanced security headers and detailed security policies. The absence of WHOIS data due to domain naming rules error introduces some uncertainty about domain registration legitimacy, though the website content and structure suggest a legitimate business presence. Overall, the website is functional, professional, and safe for general audiences.

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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

  2. Network security

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

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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

  3. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

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

    • 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';…

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

Keep watching ftcg.co.uk

This scan found 28 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
50
Average
45

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 holds a strong market position as a successful privately owned construction group in the North East UK, with a diversified portfolio through its subsidiaries. Their business model focuses on delivering construction and metalwork services with an emphasis on quality and customer care. The presence of a training program indicates investment in workforce development. The group’s external domains are well integrated, supporting brand consistency and operational transparency. However, the lack of explicit contact information and privacy policies on the main site may limit direct customer engagement and compliance visibility. The company appears to have stable operations with a clear regional focus and a professional online presence.

Security posture

The website benefits from HTTPS encryption and a cookie consent mechanism, which are positive security and privacy indicators. However, the absence of common security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security reduces the overall security robustness. No vulnerability disclosures or incident response information are provided, which could be improved to enhance trust and preparedness. The WHOIS data inconsistency raises questions about domain registration transparency but does not directly impact website security. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be strengthened by implementing additional headers, publishing security policies, and improving transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a clear and comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Add visible and verified contact information including company emails and phone numbers to facilitate communication and support.
  4. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity and incident readiness.
  5. Investigate and resolve WHOIS data inconsistencies to improve domain registration transparency and trustworthiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
FT Construction Group
Description
FT Construction Group is a privately owned construction group based in the North East of England. It comprises multiple companies including Tom Willoughby Ltd, Walter Thompson (Contractors) Ltd, and Langtons (Northallerton) Ltd. They undertake private and public sector projects with varying project values and provide metalwork and steel fabrication services. The group emphasizes professional teams dedicated to understanding client objectives and delivering quality solutions.
Key services
Construction projects up to £2 million (Tom Willoughby Ltd), Construction projects up to £15 million (Walter Thompson Contractors Ltd), Metalwork and steel fabrication (Langtons Northallerton Ltd), Training programs for site and office based skills
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.7.5, Divi Theme 4.27.4, Google Fonts (Open Sans, Rubik), jQuery (custom minimal usage), Cookie Notice plugin
Frameworks
WordPress, Divi
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and no blocking detected
  2. No privacy policy or terms of service pages explicitly found
  3. Cookie consent banner is implemented
  4. No explicit contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage
  5. Website uses WordPress with Divi theme and standard plugins
  6. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain naming rules error
  7. Multiple subsidiary company domains linked and promoted
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  9. No social media links explicitly found in header or footer
  10. No visible security headers detected in provided data
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.7.5 using the Divi theme, a popular and flexible CMS platform. It uses Google Fonts for typography and includes a cookie notice plugin for GDPR compliance. The site is mobile responsive with good navigation and content structure. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected in the HTML or CSS. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance optimizations. No analytics or tracking services were detected in the provided content, indicating minimal user tracking. Overall, the technical implementation supports a professional business website with room for security and compliance improvements.
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 ftcg.co.uk. 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 ftcg.co.uk.

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.