Skip to main content

Security report for george-labs.com

George Labs GmbH · Finance · Austria

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

George Labs GmbH operates the digital banking platform 'George', serving over 10 million users across Europe. The platform is positioned as a modern, intelligent, and personal financial companion, backed by Erste Group Bank AG. The website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design, clear branding, and multi-country banking partnerships. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with Elementor and uses modern web technologies, but suffers from critical SSL/TLS misconfigurations that undermine security. Privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned cookie consent and policies. Overall, the business is credible and well-positioned in the European digital banking sector, but must urgently address its SSL issues to ensure user trust and security.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

7 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  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 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 george-labs.com

This scan found 16 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
0
Security headers
55
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
48

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention george-labs.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for george-labs.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

George Labs leverages its parent Erste Group's banking network to deliver a pan-European digital banking experience. Its business model focuses on providing a flexible, plugin-based banking platform that integrates various financial services. The company targets digitally savvy banking customers seeking intuitive and intelligent financial management tools. Partnerships with regional banks in Austria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Croatia, and Hungary strengthen its market reach. The platform's growth is supported by a strong brand, social media presence, and a career site indicating ongoing expansion. Revenue streams likely include banking service fees and value-added financial products.

Security posture

The website demonstrates some security best practices such as setting security headers (HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) and secure cookie flags. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and lack of TLS protocol support represent critical vulnerabilities that expose users to risks including data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies was found, indicating potential gaps in security governance. Privacy compliance is strong, with cookie consent and GDPR-aligned policies. The security posture is currently weak due to SSL issues and should be prioritized for remediation.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate immediately to enable HTTPS and protect user data.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and strong cipher suites to secure communications.
  3. Implement and publicize a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact channels to enhance security transparency.
  4. Maintain and regularly audit security headers and cookie settings to uphold best practices.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and performance optimizations to improve user experience and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using Elementor page builder and Yoast SEO for optimization. It employs PHP 8.2.26 and nginx as the web server. The site includes various JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Flatpickr, and Select2. Structured data in JSON-LD format is implemented for SEO and organization information. Despite a rich content and modern design, the site lacks a valid SSL certificate and TLS support, which is a significant technical risk. Performance metrics were not available, but the use of Elementor and multiple plugins suggests moderate performance. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO practices are well implemented. Hosting provider details are limited but DNS servers indicate Austrian hosting.
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 george-labs.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 george-labs.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.