Skip to main content

Security report for gamingdirectory.com

Casino City · Hospitality · N/A

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Network security.

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Casino City's GamingDirectory.com is a specialized online subscription service providing comprehensive data on gaming industry contacts, properties, and executives worldwide. The platform targets gaming industry professionals, suppliers, and casino executives seeking detailed and frequently updated industry information. The business operates in the hospitality sector with a medium-sized footprint and has been established since 2002. Technically, the website uses legacy HTML and ColdFusion backend with JavaScript and jQuery on the frontend, hosted behind Cloudflare DNS services. Performance is fast but mobile optimization and accessibility are basic. Security posture is moderate with strong HSTS policies and valid SSL certificates, but lacks modern TLS protocol support and explicit security policies. The site uses Google Analytics and Tag Manager for tracking, but does not provide cookie consent mechanisms or detailed privacy compliance features. Overall, the website is professional with consistent branding and good content relevance but could improve in security transparency and modern web standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

3 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.

    • 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. 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 gamingdirectory.com

This scan found 15 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. 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
95
Security headers
60
Email security
85
DNS health
85
Network security
85
GDPR outside view
43
Average
76

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 niche market position as a trusted provider of gaming industry data and contacts, leveraging subscription revenue streams. Its competitive advantage lies in the breadth and frequency of data updates, covering over 28,000 executives and 9,600 properties globally. The target customers are gaming suppliers and casino executives who require detailed contact and property information for business development and competitive analysis. The company maintains partnerships with related casino industry sites, enhancing its ecosystem. Growth indicators include frequent data updates and a free trial offering to attract new subscribers. The business model is focused on recurring subscription fees with additional offerings such as printed materials and downloadable content.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with implementation of key HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy restricting frame ancestors, X-Frame-Options set to SAMEORIGIN, and a robust HSTS policy with preload enabled. The SSL certificate is valid and uses a 2048-bit key, but the absence of modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) is a significant gap that could expose users to weaker encryption. No explicit security policy, incident response plan, or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, indicating limited transparency and preparedness. The lack of DNSSEC and CAA records further reduces DNS security. Data protection practices are basic, with no visible cookie consent or GDPR compliance mechanisms. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not evident from the site content.

Recommendations

  1. Enable TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3 protocols to enhance encryption security.
  2. Implement a comprehensive cookie policy with user consent mechanisms to improve privacy compliance.
  3. Publish explicit security policies and incident response procedures to increase transparency and trust.
  4. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Improve mobile optimization and accessibility to enhance user experience and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on legacy technologies including ColdFusion and HTML 4.0 Transitional, with frontend reliance on jQuery and custom JavaScript. Hosting is managed via Cloudflare DNS services, providing some security and performance benefits. The absence of modern TLS protocols and lack of DNSSEC and CAA records indicate technical debt and potential security risks. Performance is fast with minimal resource loading, but mobile and accessibility features are basic. SEO optimization is also basic, with no structured data or Open Graph metadata detected. The site would benefit from modernization efforts including updated frameworks, improved security protocols, and enhanced user experience 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 gamingdirectory.com. 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 gamingdirectory.com.

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.