Skip to main content

Security report for geoville.com

GeoVille Information Systems and Data Processing GmbH · Technology · Austria

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

30/100

Risk levelHigh

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

GeoVille Information Systems and Data Processing GmbH is a medium-sized Austrian technology company specializing in satellite-based Earth Observation services. With over 25 years of experience and a global footprint spanning 140 countries and 510 implementations, GeoVille offers a range of services including satellite imagery, data access, land monitoring analytics, platform interfaces, and advisory capacity building. Their target audience includes government agencies, environmental organizations, and sectors such as energy, security, and urban planning. The website is built on TYPO3 CMS with modern frontend technologies and demonstrates good design and navigation, though performance data is limited. From a technical perspective, the website uses Apache server technology and integrates libraries such as Bootstrap, jQuery, FontAwesome, and Google Tag Manager. However, the site lacks HTTPS encryption, which is a critical security deficiency. Security headers are minimal, and no advanced security mechanisms like HSTS or OCSP stapling are enabled. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy page present but no cookie consent mechanism detected. Contact information is limited to a contact form, with no direct emails or phone numbers published. The security posture is weak due to the absence of SSL/TLS, exposing users to potential interception risks. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, which could impact trust. The domain registration data is consistent with the company's claims, showing a long-established presence since 1998. Social media presence is strong, supporting business credibility. Overall, the website is professionally designed and content-rich but requires urgent security improvements, especially enabling HTTPS and enhancing privacy compliance. Strategic recommendations include installing a valid SSL certificate, implementing cookie consent mechanisms, publishing security policies, and improving contact transparency to enhance trust and compliance.

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

10 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

  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 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 geoville.com

This scan found 19 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
25
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
0
Average
30

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 geoville.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
14
Employees
0
Customers
8
Third parties
6
Weak passwords
0%

3 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for geoville.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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

GeoVille holds a strong market position as a specialized provider of satellite-based geospatial information solutions, serving diverse sectors such as agriculture, climate change, energy, environment, security, and space mission support. Their business model focuses on B2B services, leveraging advanced technologies to deliver data products and analytics. The company demonstrates a global reach with extensive project implementations and a well-established brand. Partnerships and social media engagement indicate active market presence. Growth indicators include continuous innovation and capacity building services. However, the lack of direct contact details and limited visible certifications may constrain some business opportunities.

Security posture

The current security posture of the GeoVille website is suboptimal. The absence of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability that undermines data confidentiality and user trust. Minimal security headers are present, but important protections like HSTS, Content-Security-Policy, and Referrer-Policy are missing. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is available, indicating limited transparency and preparedness. The site does not implement cookie consent mechanisms, raising GDPR compliance concerns. While no known SSL vulnerabilities or malware are detected, the lack of encryption and security best practices significantly lowers the security maturity level. Immediate remediation is required to mitigate risks and align with industry standards.

Recommendations

  1. Install and configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire website.
  2. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Add comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Referrer-Policy, and X-Frame-Options.
  4. Publish a security policy and vulnerability disclosure page, including a security.txt file.
  5. Introduce a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance privacy transparency.
  6. Provide direct contact information including company emails and phone numbers for better user trust.
  7. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and scripts to avoid vulnerabilities.
  8. Enhance accessibility features and performance optimizations for improved user experience.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on TYPO3 CMS, leveraging Apache as the web server and incorporating frontend frameworks such as Bootstrap and jQuery. It uses modern UI components like Slick Carousel and Lottie animations for enhanced interactivity. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing purposes. However, the site lacks HTTPS, which is a major technical deficiency. Performance metrics are unavailable, but the presence of multiple compressed CSS and JS assets suggests some optimization efforts. Mobile responsiveness is good, but accessibility features are basic. The absence of SSL and limited security headers represent significant technical risks that could impact business operations and user trust.
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 geoville.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 geoville.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.