Skip to main content

Security report for ggdrotterdamrijnmond.nl

GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond · Healthcare · Netherlands

Low risk. 1 critical or high finding in SSL/TLS.

Security score

77/100

Risk levelLow

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

GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond is a regional public health organization dedicated to protecting and promoting the health of residents in the Rotterdam-Rijnmond area. The website serves as an official portal providing health information, vaccination services, sexual health testing, travel health advice, and public health research. It targets residents, healthcare professionals, and travelers, positioning itself as a trusted government health authority. The site is well-branded with municipal affiliation and maintains active social media channels for outreach. Technically, the website is built on modern frameworks including Next.js and React, with evidence of Drupal CMS usage for content management. It employs accessibility features such as ReadSpeaker for text-to-speech and is optimized for mobile devices. Performance is fast, and SEO best practices are followed with proper meta tags and structured content. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS and implements cookie consent mechanisms. While explicit security headers are not fully confirmed, no vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The absence of a published security policy or vulnerability disclosure page suggests room for improvement in transparency and incident response readiness. Overall, the website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, trustworthiness, and compliance with privacy regulations such as GDPR. The domain registration aligns with the organization's public nature, reinforcing legitimacy. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security header implementation, publishing security policies, and adding vulnerability disclosure mechanisms to further strengthen security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 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

1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching ggdrotterdamrijnmond.nl

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
75
Security headers
80
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
77

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

GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond operates as a large, essential public health entity within the healthcare and government sectors in the Netherlands. Its business model is service-oriented, funded by municipal government resources, focusing on health promotion, disease prevention, and public health monitoring. The organization maintains a strong market position as the regional health authority, with competitive advantages including official government backing, comprehensive health services, and community trust. The website supports multiple user segments including residents, professionals, and travelers, indicating a broad target audience. Growth indicators include active news updates and recruitment postings. The partnership ecosystem includes social media platforms for engagement but no direct commercial partners were identified on the site.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and no visible security flaws or exposed sensitive information. Cookie consent is implemented, supporting privacy compliance. However, the lack of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of a public security policy or incident response contact limits transparency and preparedness. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present, which is a common best practice for public-facing health organizations. Overall, the site is secure but could improve in formalizing and publishing security governance and incident response information to enhance trust and readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Add and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  3. Create and maintain a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  4. Enhance transparency by providing contact details for security incidents or data protection officer if applicable.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies to ensure no vulnerabilities are introduced.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond
Description
De GGD Rotterdam-Rijnmond beschermt en bevordert de gezondheid van alle inwoners van de regio en streeft naar goede, voor iedereen toegankelijke gezondheidszorg.
Key services
Sexual health testing and advice, Vaccinations and infection disease control, Travel health advice and vaccinations, Public health research and monitoring, Health promotion and disease prevention
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Next.js, React, ReadSpeaker (webReader.js), Custom fonts (Avenir Next), SVG icons
Frameworks
Next.js
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure cookies consent mechanism
  • No vulnerable libraries detected in scripts

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
ReadSpeaker webReader
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professionally presented in Dutch with clear health-related information.
  3. Strong presence of official branding and municipal affiliation.
  4. Multiple social media channels linked to official accounts.
  5. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented and visible.
  6. No explicit terms of service page found.
  7. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page.
  8. Use of modern web technologies and frameworks.
  9. No exposed sensitive data or obvious security issues detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website leverages a modern technology stack centered on Next.js and React, providing server-side rendering and fast performance. The use of Drupal CMS for content management supports structured and scalable content delivery. Accessibility is enhanced with ReadSpeaker integration, and responsive design ensures usability across devices. The site uses SVG icons and custom fonts for branding consistency. Performance is optimized with preloading of CSS and scripts. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Opportunities exist to improve security header implementation and to document security practices publicly.
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 ggdrotterdamrijnmond.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 ggdrotterdamrijnmond.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.