Skip to main content

Security report for glassbel.com

Glassbel · Other · N/a

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

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Glassbel is a company with an online presence dating back to 2004, likely operating in the glass products or services sector. The website is built on the Bitrix CMS platform and employs Bitrix analytics for user tracking. The site design is professional and mobile-optimized, providing a good user experience with clear navigation. However, the website lacks critical compliance and security documentation such as privacy policies, cookie consent mechanisms, terms of service, and contact information, which are essential for trust and regulatory adherence. The WHOIS data indicates a legitimate and long-standing domain registration, supporting the business's credibility. Security posture is moderate but could be improved by enabling DNSSEC and implementing security headers.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

7 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 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 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 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn

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

  3. 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.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

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

Keep watching glassbel.com

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. 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
62
Security headers
45
Email security
77
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
65
Average
60

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 glassbel.com, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1
Employees
0
Customers
0
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
0%

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 glassbel.com.

Select it in the checkout above.

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

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)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 business appears to be a small to medium-sized entity with a consistent brand presence. The lack of detailed business descriptions and contact information limits deeper business intelligence insights. The use of Bitrix CMS and analytics suggests a focus on digital engagement, but absence of privacy and security policies may hinder customer trust and compliance with regulations such as GDPR. No partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the domain or website content. The company should consider enhancing transparency and compliance to strengthen market position and customer confidence.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS, but no explicit security headers were detected in the provided data. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a missed opportunity to secure DNS queries. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were identified in the HTML content. The absence of security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms indicates a low maturity in security governance. The site uses Bitrix analytics, which involves user tracking but lacks visible cookie consent mechanisms, raising privacy compliance concerns. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires improvements in policy transparency, technical security controls, and privacy compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  3. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security incident reporting.
  5. Establish and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Glassbel
Description
Glassbel is a company presumably related to glass products or services, as indicated by the website title and keywords. No detailed business description is provided in the HTML content.
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bitrix, Roboto font, Tactic font
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100

Analytics and tracking

Services
Bitrix analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
bitrix.info
Marketing tools
Bitrix analytics
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website uses Bitrix CMS and Bitrix analytics scripts.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the homepage HTML content.
  3. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses explicitly found in the HTML content.
  4. No social media links detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  5. No security or incident response policies or contacts found.
  6. Website is accessible without WAF or security challenge.
  7. WHOIS data shows a long-established domain with consistent registration data.
  8. No explicit GDPR compliance indicators or data protection officer information found.
  9. Website design is professional with responsive and mobile-optimized layout.
  10. Tracking via Bitrix analytics is present but no explicit cookie consent mechanism detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Bitrix CMS, a widely used platform, and uses custom fonts (Roboto and Tactic). The site loads CSS asynchronously for performance optimization and includes Bitrix analytics scripts. Hosting appears to be managed via Lithuanian nameservers (serveriai.lt). The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. SEO metadata is present but minimal. No major technical issues or broken elements were detected in the HTML snippet. Performance is moderate, with room for improvement in SEO and accessibility standards.
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 glassbel.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 glassbel.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.