Skip to main content

Security report for fud-tech.eu

Fud-Tech · Manufacturing · N/a

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 3 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Fud-Tech is a specialized provider of food and drink manufacturing lines and related equipment, offering a range of services including design, installation, and training. The company targets businesses in the food processing and manufacturing sector, providing niche industrial solutions. The website is built on WordPress using the Avada theme and includes modern web technologies such as Revolution Slider and Google Analytics for tracking. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and professionally designed, reflecting a small but focused business operation. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies. Contact information is limited to a contact form, with no direct emails or phone numbers visible. Overall, the domain registration is consistent with the business profile, indicating legitimacy and stability.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

11 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

  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

  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 fud-tech.eu

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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
40

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 manufacturing sector, specifically targeting food and beverage production lines and equipment. Its business model is B2B, focusing on providing customized manufacturing solutions and services. The website content and portfolio indicate a regional market presence with specialized equipment offerings such as dairy, meat, chocolate processing, and packaging lines. The absence of direct contact details and limited online presence suggests a small-sized enterprise with a focused client base. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager indicates some level of digital marketing and user behavior tracking. No partnerships or subsidiaries are explicitly mentioned, and no social media presence is detected, which may limit broader market reach.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a good SSL configuration, ensuring encrypted communications. However, it lacks important security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS, which are recommended to mitigate common web vulnerabilities. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present, indicating limited transparency in security incident handling. The site uses standard WordPress plugins and themes, which if not regularly updated, could pose security risks. No exposed sensitive data or credentials were found in the HTML content. The absence of direct contact emails for security or abuse reporting reduces incident response readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be improved with better header implementation and explicit security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  3. Provide direct contact information including emails and phone numbers for sales, support, and security incident reporting.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities and improve performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Fud-Tech
Description
Pārtikas un dzērienu ražošanas līnijas iekārtas, agregāti, kā arī līniju komplektēšana, projektēšana, iekārtas uzstādīšana un apmācības darbā ar tām.
Key services
Manufacturing lines and pilot lines, Fruit, berry, vegetable processing equipment, Dairy processing equipment, Meat processing equipment, Chocolate equipment, Filling and packaging, Confectionery dosing, injection, decoration equipment, Scales
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 5.0.22, Avada Theme 5.8, Revolution Slider 5.4.8.1, jQuery 1.12.4, Google Analytics, Contact Form 7, Bellows Accordion Menu
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress site using Avada theme and Revolution Slider
  2. Content is in Latvian language with English elements
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found
  4. Contact available via contact form only, no direct emails or phone numbers found
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure present
  6. Google Analytics and Tag Manager used for tracking
  7. No social media links detected
  8. No security headers detected in HTML content
  9. Site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration
  10. No adult or questionable content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a mature CMS platform (WordPress) with a popular commercial theme (Avada) and uses several well-known plugins including Revolution Slider and Contact Form 7. The tech stack includes jQuery and Google Fonts, with Google Analytics and Tag Manager for analytics. The site is mobile responsive and has good SEO meta tags and Open Graph data for social sharing. Performance is moderate, with some optimization opportunities in script loading and caching. Accessibility features are basic but present. No critical technical debt or outdated technologies were detected, but security-related technical improvements are recommended.
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 fud-tech.eu. 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 fud-tech.eu.

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.