Skip to main content

Security report for gjensidige.com

Gjensidige · Finance · Norway

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Gjensidige is a leading Norwegian non-life insurance company operating primarily in the Nordic and Baltic regions. The company offers a broad range of insurance products including general insurance, pensions, savings, and mobility services. The website reflects a mature and professional digital presence with comprehensive content targeting individuals and businesses. The company maintains an open investor relations section and emphasizes sustainability and social responsibility. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies including JavaScript, SVG graphics, and a cookie consent management platform (Usercentrics). The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO practices. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data exposure, though explicit security headers and incident response information are not published. The absence of WHOIS data for the domain www.gjensidige.com is a notable anomaly that slightly reduces trust from a domain registration perspective. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and well-maintained, supporting Gjensidige's market position as a major Nordic insurer.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
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

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 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';…
  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

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

Keep watching gjensidige.com

This scan found 18 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
100
Security headers
55
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
79

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 gjensidige.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
2
Employees
0
Customers
2
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
0%

1 subdomain 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 gjensidige.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Gjensidige holds a strong market position as a leading general insurance provider in the Nordic region, with operations in Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and the Baltic countries. Their business model focuses on providing tailored insurance solutions for individuals and businesses, supplemented by pensions, savings, and mobility services. The company employs over 4,600 people and demonstrates commitment to sustainability and social responsibility. Their investor relations practices comply with Oslo Børs standards, indicating transparency and governance maturity. The website's content and linked domains suggest a well-established partnership ecosystem within the Nordic insurance market. Growth indicators include active recruitment and regular financial disclosures. The company leverages digital channels effectively for communication and branding.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses a reputable cookie consent management system, indicating attention to privacy compliance. No security headers such as Content Security Policy or HSTS were detected, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. There is no publicly available security policy or incident response contact information, which limits transparency in security governance. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The use of third-party analytics and tag management (Tealium) is present but appears compliant with privacy standards. Overall, the security posture is good but could be improved by publishing security policies, adding security headers, and establishing a vulnerability disclosure program.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a formal security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Add HTTP security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), Strict-Transport-Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide clear contact information for data protection officer or security team to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure ongoing privacy compliance and minimize risk.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gjensidige
Description
Gjensidige is a Norwegian non-life insurance company that offers insurance products in Norway, Denmark, Sweden and the Baltic countries. In Norway, they also offer pensions and savings. They insure individuals and businesses and tailor solutions as needed.
Key services
Non-life insurance, Pensions and savings (Norway), Mobility services (Flyt and REDGO)
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Usercentrics CMP, Tealium (utag.js), SVG graphics, Web fonts (woff2)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Usercentrics for cookie consent
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Tealium
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Tealium
Marketing tools
Usercentrics CMP
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and navigation
  2. Strong corporate branding and consistent design
  3. Use of modern web technologies and cookie consent management
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers visible on main pages
  5. WHOIS data missing, which is unusual for a corporate domain
  6. No explicit security policy or incident response info published
  7. Good privacy and cookie policy presence and compliance
  8. Social media presence on Instagram and LinkedIn
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a custom CMS platform (Builders Platform) with modern front-end technologies including JavaScript modules, SVG graphics, and web fonts optimized for performance. The site uses asynchronous loading for analytics and consent management scripts, improving load times. Preconnect and preload hints are used for critical resources, indicating performance optimization efforts. The site is mobile responsive with good accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA labels. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags and Open Graph data. No major technical debt or outdated technologies were detected. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified from the 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 gjensidige.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 gjensidige.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.