Skip to main content

Security report for geoforum.nl

Capgemini Nederland B.V. · Government · Netherlands

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

Security score

76/100

Risk levelLow

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

Geoforum.nl is a Dutch language community forum dedicated to geographic information and software, primarily serving professionals and enthusiasts in the geospatial domain within the Netherlands. The platform facilitates knowledge sharing, discussions, and support around open datasets, geo-standards, applications, and events. It is operated under the registrar Capgemini Nederland B.V., a reputable company, which aligns with the professional nature of the site. Technically, the website is built on the modern Discourse forum software (version 3.4.1), leveraging JavaScript frameworks such as Ember.js and structured data via JSON-LD for SEO. The site is served over HTTPS with DNSSEC enabled, indicating a good baseline security posture. The design is professional, mobile-optimized, and content-rich with clear navigation and multiple active categories. Security-wise, the site benefits from HTTPS and DNSSEC but lacks explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies or consent mechanisms. Overall, Geoforum.nl presents a trustworthy and professional community platform with solid technical foundations but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and formal security documentation to improve user trust and regulatory adherence.

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

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.

    • 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

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

Keep watching geoforum.nl

This scan found 18 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
90
Security headers
80
Email security
80
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
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

Geoforum.nl occupies a niche position as a community forum supporting the Dutch geospatial data ecosystem. Its business model revolves around fostering collaboration and knowledge exchange among users of geographic information systems and open government data. The platform's partnership ecosystem includes related government and open data sites such as PDOK and Nationaal Georegister. The site demonstrates growth through active user engagement and a broad range of topics. Revenue streams are not explicit but likely indirect through Capgemini's broader service offerings. The target customer segments include GIS professionals, government agencies, developers, and data users in the Netherlands.

Security posture

The website exhibits a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS and DNSSEC enabled, reducing risks of interception and DNS spoofing. However, the lack of published security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure processes indicates gaps in formal security governance. No vulnerable libraries or exposed credentials were found. The site uses nonce attributes on scripts, enhancing protection against certain injection attacks. Compliance with GDPR is not clearly demonstrated due to missing privacy and cookie policies. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not visible from the content.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Implement and publicly disclose a security policy and incident response contact information.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance security posture.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct regular security audits to maintain trust and compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Capgemini Nederland B.V.
Description
Platform for questions about geographic information and software, focused on Dutch open datasets and geospatial topics.
Key services
Discussion forums on datasets, Support for geo-standards and applications, Event announcements, Knowledge sharing on geospatial topics
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Discourse 3.4.1, JavaScript, Ember.js, OpenSearch, JSON-LD
Frameworks
Discourse
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • DNSSEC enabled
  • Use of nonce attributes on scripts

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a Dutch language community forum focused on geographic information and software.
  2. Uses Discourse forum software with multiple categories and active topics.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  5. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy detected.
  6. No incident response or security policy information found.
  7. Website uses HTTPS and DNSSEC, indicating good baseline security.
  8. No advertising or tracking scripts detected in the provided content.
  9. Content is rich with many categories and topics, indicating an active community.
  10. Technical implementation is modern with Discourse and JSON-LD structured data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and well-supported forum platform, Discourse 3.4.1, built on Ember.js and JavaScript. It employs JSON-LD structured data for SEO and OpenSearch for search integration. The site is mobile-optimized and uses theme-based CSS for light and dark modes. Performance is moderate with preloaded scripts and deferred loading. Hosting provider details are not explicit. There is no evidence of legacy or vulnerable libraries. Technical risks are low but could be improved by adding security headers and formalizing privacy and security documentation.
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 geoforum.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 geoforum.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.