Skip to main content

Security report for gaertner-von-eden.de

Gärtner von Eden e.G. · Other · Germany

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Gärtner von Eden e.G. is a professional garden design and construction company based in Germany, specializing in exclusive garden planning and landscaping services. The company targets private and commercial clients seeking high-quality garden solutions. Their website reflects a mature digital presence with a focus on user experience, SEO, and privacy compliance. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Divi theme, incorporating modern tools such as hCaptcha and Cookiebot for security and privacy. Security posture is good with HTTPS and security headers implemented, though the absence of a public security policy and incident response details suggests room for improvement. The domain WHOIS data is missing, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy, but the website content and business information appear consistent and professional. Overall, the site scores well on content quality and technical implementation but should address WHOIS transparency and security policy publication to enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 100 · Low
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. 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';…

  2. 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching gaertner-von-eden.de

This scan found 21 issues across 5 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
77
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
100
Average
60

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 garden design and landscaping sector, serving a medium-sized market in Germany. Their business model is service-oriented, focusing on bespoke garden planning and construction. The website's SEO and social media presence indicate a strategic approach to customer acquisition and brand building. No evidence of parent or subsidiary companies was found. The company maintains a consistent brand image and provides clear contact information, including email, phone, and physical address. The lack of WHOIS data is a potential risk factor but does not currently impact operational credibility. The company could benefit from expanding certifications and publishing security and incident response policies to strengthen market confidence.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with good SSL configuration and includes essential security headers, enhancing protection against common web threats. Use of hCaptcha on forms reduces spam and bot risks. Cookie consent is managed via Cookiebot with automatic blocking, supporting GDPR compliance. However, the absence of a dedicated security policy, vulnerability disclosure, and incident response contact channels limits transparency and preparedness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. To improve security maturity, the company should publish security policies, implement a vulnerability disclosure program, and provide clear incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Add incident response contact information such as security@ or abuse@ email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit and update all third-party plugins and libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency by ensuring WHOIS domain registration data is complete and publicly accessible.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Gärtner von Eden e.G.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gärtner von Eden e.G.
Description
Entdecken Sie die Welt der Gartengestaltung mit Gärtner von Eden. Professionelle Gartenplanung und Gartenbau für grüne Paradiese
Key services
Gartengestaltung, Gartenplanung, Gartenbau
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Divi Theme, jQuery, Google Maps API, hCaptcha, Cookiebot
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with blocking mode
  • Use of hCaptcha for forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (gtag.js)
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content-rich for garden design services.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which reduces trust in domain registration legitimacy.
  3. Good privacy and cookie compliance with Cookiebot integration.
  4. No visible security policy or incident response information.
  5. Use of modern technologies and SEO best practices.
  6. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  7. No WAF or blocking detected; site fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with the Divi theme, leveraging jQuery and modern JavaScript libraries. It integrates Google Maps API for location services and uses hCaptcha for form protection. Cookiebot manages cookie consent with automatic blocking, indicating a mature privacy approach. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in loading speed and accessibility features. Hosting provider details were not identified. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and user-friendly experience but could benefit from enhanced accessibility and performance tuning.
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 gaertner-von-eden.de. 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 gaertner-von-eden.de.

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.