Skip to main content

Security report for ginsterhof.de

Ev. Krankenhaus Ginsterhof GmbH · Healthcare · Germany

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

39/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Ev. Krankenhaus Ginsterhof GmbH is a non-profit psychosomatic hospital located near Hamburg, Germany, specializing in modern psychosomatic and psychotherapeutic treatments. The clinic operates seven inpatient stations with 140 beds and 20 day clinic places, offering individualized treatment concepts based on deep psychological therapy. The website reflects a professional healthcare provider with a clear focus on patient care and recovery. The presence of EU funding logos and detailed service descriptions reinforce its established market position in regional healthcare. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using Elementor and Yoast SEO plugins, indicating a modern and maintainable infrastructure. The site is mobile-optimized and SEO-friendly, with good content quality and clear navigation. Performance is moderate, with no major technical issues detected. However, some accessibility features could be improved. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration but lacks explicit security headers and publicly available security or incident response policies. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. Privacy compliance is generally good, with a comprehensive privacy policy present, but the cookie consent mechanism is minimal and could be enhanced. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and well-suited for its healthcare audience. Strategic improvements in security headers, incident response transparency, and cookie consent would further strengthen its security posture and compliance.

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

9 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

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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 ginsterhof.de

This scan found 30 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
28
Average
39

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 · found on this site
  • 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 ginsterhof.de, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for ginsterhof.de 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

The hospital targets patients requiring psychosomatic and psychotherapeutic care in the Hamburg region, operating as a non-profit entity. Its business model focuses on providing high-quality healthcare services without profit orientation, supported by EU funding. The clinic's competitive advantage lies in its specialized treatment offerings, modern facilities including a comfort station for private patients, and a strong regional presence. The website supports patient engagement through detailed service descriptions, online registration options, and informational events. The absence of commercial advertising and tracking indicates a focus on patient privacy and trust. The partnership ecosystem is not explicitly detailed, but the use of t-online.de DNS and EU funding suggests integration with regional healthcare and funding bodies.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data exposure. However, the absence of security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces its defense-in-depth. There is no public security policy or incident response information, which limits transparency and preparedness perception. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present, which could hinder coordinated vulnerability reporting. Privacy practices are generally compliant with GDPR, supported by a comprehensive privacy policy, but the cookie consent mechanism lacks explicit user interaction. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a healthcare informational site but could be improved to meet higher standards and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Develop and publish a clear security policy and incident response plan accessible to users and partners.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Enhance the cookie consent mechanism to actively obtain user consent in compliance with GDPR requirements.
  5. Improve website accessibility features to ensure compliance with WCAG standards and better serve all users.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Ev. Krankenhaus Ginsterhof GmbH
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ev. Krankenhaus Ginsterhof GmbH
Description
Nahe Hamburg bieten wir moderne psychosomatische und psychotherapeutische Behandlungen auf 7 Stationen, 140 Betten & 20 Tagesplätze.
Key services
Psychosomatic treatment, Psychotherapeutic treatment, Inpatient and day clinic care, Comfort station for private patients
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Yoast SEO, jQuery
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No visible vulnerable libraries

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. Content is professionally presented and relevant to healthcare.
  3. No tracking or advertising scripts detected.
  4. No explicit cookie consent mechanism despite cookie policy presence.
  5. WHOIS data is minimal but domain appears legitimate.
  6. No security policy or incident response information publicly available.
  7. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found.
  8. Contact information is clearly presented with phone and email links.
  9. Website uses modern WordPress technologies and SEO best practices.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using Elementor for page building and Yoast SEO for search engine optimization. It employs jQuery and other standard JavaScript libraries. The site loads external CSS and JS resources efficiently and uses lazy loading for images to improve performance. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified, but DNS servers are operated by t-online.de, a major German ISP. The site is mobile responsive with good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. No major technical debt or deprecated libraries were detected. Performance is moderate, with opportunities for optimization in accessibility and security headers.
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 ginsterhof.de. 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 ginsterhof.de.

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.