Skip to main content

Security report for gis-sanktingbert.de

Stadt St. Ingbert · Government · Germany

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website gis-sanktingbert.de serves as the official geoportal for the city of St. Ingbert, Germany, providing comprehensive geospatial data and mapping services to residents and stakeholders. The portal offers various map-based services including topographic maps, building plans, land use plans, construction site information, environmental data, and public reporting tools. The site is clearly positioned as a local government service with a focus on transparency and public accessibility. Technically, the site employs a classic web stack with Bootstrap 3.2.0, jQuery 1.12.4, and Font Awesome 4.0.3, alongside geospatial technologies such as UMN Mapserver, PostgreSQL/PostGIS, and OpenLayers as indicated in metadata keywords. Hosting is provided by Contabo, a known hosting provider, with stable DNS configuration. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile use, though some modernization opportunities exist, particularly updating JavaScript libraries and enhancing accessibility. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS but lacks visible security headers and a cookie consent mechanism, which are important for GDPR compliance and security hardening. No forms or sensitive data exposure were detected on the homepage, reducing immediate risk. The privacy policy is present and linked, indicating basic compliance with data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could be improved to enhance trust. Overall, the website demonstrates a solid foundation as a municipal geoportal with good content quality and business credibility. Security posture is adequate but could benefit from enhancements in headers, consent mechanisms, and updated libraries. The site is safe for general audiences with no adult or questionable content. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance and security practices would further strengthen the portal's trustworthiness and regulatory adherence.

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

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

      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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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

  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 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 gis-sanktingbert.de

This scan found 27 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. See sample alerts.

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
35
Email security
60
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
59

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 gis-sanktingbert.de, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for gis-sanktingbert.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 St. Ingbert geoportal operates as a government essential entity focused on providing geospatial information services to the local community. Its market position is that of a municipal service provider, offering key services such as topographic mapping, building and land use plans, and environmental data. The business model is public sector service delivery, funded and operated by the city administration. The target audience includes residents, planners, developers, and public officials. The portal's competitive advantage lies in its official status and comprehensive local geodata offerings. There is no indication of revenue streams beyond public funding. The partnership ecosystem is limited, with no external business partners or subsidiaries identified. Growth indicators are not evident from the site content. The portal maintains consistent branding aligned with city identity and demonstrates good content relevance and navigation clarity.

Security posture

The website's security maturity is moderate. HTTPS is implemented, ensuring encrypted communication. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. The use of an outdated jQuery version could pose vulnerabilities if exploited, though no immediate issues were detected. No forms or input fields on the homepage reduce attack surface. Privacy policy presence indicates awareness of data protection requirements, but lack of cookie consent and incident response information suggests gaps in compliance and readiness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a public informational site but requires improvements to meet higher standards and regulatory expectations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to comply with GDPR and ePrivacy Directive.
  2. Add and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Upgrade JavaScript libraries, especially jQuery, to current secure versions to mitigate known vulnerabilities.
  4. Publish explicit security and incident response policies to improve transparency and readiness.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet recognized standards and improve user experience for all users.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Stadt St. Ingbert
Description
Geoportal der Stadt St. Ingbert providing extensive geodata and map services related to the city of St. Ingbert, including topographic maps, building plans, land use plans, construction sites, environmental data, and public reporting services.
Key services
Topographic map services, Building plans (Bebauungspläne), Land use plans (Flächennutzungsplan), Baulücken (building gap) cadastre, Construction site overview, Environmental data services, Public reporting via map interface
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 3.2.0, jQuery 1.12.4, Font Awesome 4.0.3, UMN Mapserver (mentioned in keywords), PostgreSQL/PostGIS (mentioned in keywords), OpenLayers (mentioned in keywords)
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage assumed (URL uses https)
  • No visible exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected from included scripts

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a municipal geoportal for St. Ingbert city providing geospatial data and map services.
  2. Content is in German language and targeted at local residents and stakeholders.
  3. No forms detected on the homepage; interactive map services are linked externally.
  4. No social media or email contacts explicitly listed on homepage.
  5. No cookie consent banner or explicit cookie policy found.
  6. Uses older versions of jQuery and Bootstrap but no known vulnerabilities detected in included scripts.
  7. No visible security headers in HTML source; HTTPS usage assumed but not verified from data.
  8. WHOIS data shows domain hosted on Contabo nameservers, consistent with website content.
  9. No advertising or tracking scripts detected.
  10. No explicit incident response or security policy information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a traditional web technology stack with Bootstrap 3.2.0 and jQuery 1.12.4, which are somewhat outdated but functional. The presence of Font Awesome 4.0.3 supports iconography. The site is custom-built with CMS-specific CSS and JS files, indicating a bespoke content management system. Hosting is via Contabo, a reputable provider, with stable DNS configuration. Performance is moderate with no major issues detected, though modern optimizations could improve speed. Mobile optimization is basic, with responsive Bootstrap but no advanced mobile features. SEO is basic with meta description and keywords present but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags. Accessibility is minimal with basic support for older IE versions but no ARIA or other modern accessibility features. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modernization and enhanced standards compliance.
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 gis-sanktingbert.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 gis-sanktingbert.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.