Skip to main content

Security report for ghor-amsterdam-amstelland.nl

GHOR Amsterdam Amstelland · Government · Netherlands

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

GHOR Amsterdam Amstelland is a regional governmental organization responsible for coordinating medical emergency response in the Amsterdam-Amstelland area. Their website serves as an information hub for GHOR officials and partners, providing news, contact details, and resources related to crisis management and public health. The site is built on the IPROX CMS platform, a common choice for Dutch governmental websites, and employs HTTPS with Google Analytics tracking configured for IP anonymization. The content is well-structured and professionally presented, targeting a specialized audience involved in emergency preparedness and response. Technically, the website demonstrates moderate digital maturity with a modern CMS and basic SEO and accessibility features. The site is mobile-optimized and includes a cookie consent mechanism, though it lacks a dedicated privacy policy page and visible security headers in the HTML content. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data, but there is room for improvement in publishing security policies and incident response information. Overall, the website is trustworthy and credible, reflecting its governmental nature and regional focus. However, enhancements in privacy compliance documentation, security header implementation, and incident response transparency would strengthen its security and compliance posture. No blocking or WAF challenges were detected, allowing full content access and analysis.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

6 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 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 Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Twitter

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

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

Keep watching ghor-amsterdam-amstelland.nl

This scan found 21 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
72
Security headers
90
Email security
60
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
68

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

GHOR Amsterdam Amstelland operates as a key regional governmental entity in the public safety and healthcare sector, focusing on medical emergency coordination during crises. Its market position is authoritative within the Amsterdam-Amstelland region, serving GHOR officials and multidisciplinary partners. The business model centers on public service and crisis management, supported by partnerships with regional safety authorities and national organizations like GGD GHOR Nederland. The website supports communication and training efforts, offering newsletters, advisories, and project information such as the Zorgrisicoprofiel. The organization maintains a moderate size typical of regional government bodies, with a consistent brand and professional online presence. Strategic partnerships and external links indicate a collaborative ecosystem essential for effective emergency response.

Security posture

The website's security posture is solid with mandatory HTTPS encryption and a cookie consent mechanism that respects user privacy preferences. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. There is no publicly available security policy or incident response contact information, which limits transparency and preparedness communication. The use of Google Analytics with IP anonymization is a positive privacy practice. Overall, the site demonstrates a good baseline security level appropriate for a governmental informational site but would benefit from enhanced security documentation and header configurations.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy page to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to enhance transparency and preparedness.
  4. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Regularly review and update cookie consent mechanisms and analytics configurations to maintain privacy compliance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GHOR Amsterdam Amstelland
Description
GHOR Amsterdam Amstelland is the regional medical emergency response organization coordinating medical aid during crises and disasters in the Amsterdam-Amstelland region. The website provides news, contact info, documents, and resources for GHOR officials and partners.
Key services
Coordination of medical emergency response, Information dissemination, Training and exercises, Advisory services, Crisis communication
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Analytics
Frameworks
IPROX.NET 4
Platforms
IPROX CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner with allow/deny options
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

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 primarily in Dutch, targeting regional emergency responders and partners.
  3. No explicit privacy policy page found, but cookie policy and consent mechanism present.
  4. Contact information includes an official email and contact form but no phone number or physical address explicitly listed.
  5. Uses IPROX CMS platform, common for Dutch governmental sites.
  6. Google Analytics is used with IP anonymization enabled.
  7. No visible security headers detected in HTML content; likely configured at server level but not confirmed.
  8. No visible security or incident response policies published.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  10. Social media presence limited to Twitter.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the IPROX.NET 4 CMS platform hosted by InfoProjects bv, a specialized provider for large Dutch web environments. The technology stack includes JavaScript and Google Analytics with IP anonymization enabled. The site uses responsive design techniques for mobile optimization and includes basic accessibility features. Performance is moderate, with no major issues detected in the HTML structure or resource loading. SEO is basic but functional, with meta viewport and canonical tags present. There is an opportunity to modernize technical implementation by adding advanced SEO tags, improving accessibility compliance, and enhancing security headers. The site does not expose any sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries based on the provided HTML content.
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 ghor-amsterdam-amstelland.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 ghor-amsterdam-amstelland.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.