Skip to main content

Security report for google.nl

Google LLC · Technology · United States

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

72/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Google LLC operates the world's leading search engine and a broad portfolio of internet-related services and products, including advertising technologies, cloud computing, and software. As a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., Google holds a dominant market position with a global user base and extensive service offerings. The website reflects Google's brand consistency and professionalism, targeting general internet users worldwide with a business model primarily driven by advertising revenue. Technically, the website employs a modern and proprietary technology stack, leveraging Google's own cloud infrastructure and frameworks. The site is optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and accessibility, ensuring a fast and user-friendly experience. SEO best practices and structured data are well implemented, supporting Google's search dominance. From a security perspective, Google demonstrates a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and no visible vulnerabilities. Privacy compliance is robust, with clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms aligned with GDPR requirements. However, direct contact information for security or incident response is not publicly disclosed on the homepage. Overall, the website is highly trustworthy, professional, and secure, reflecting Google's stature as a global technology leader. The risk level is low, with recommendations focusing on maintaining current security standards and continuous monitoring for emerging threats.

Scanned

This is an earlier scan of google.nl. View the latest report

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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

4 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

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching google.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. 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
52
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
73
Average
72

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

Google's market positioning as the dominant search engine and advertising platform provides significant competitive advantages, including vast data resources and brand recognition. The business model centers on monetizing search and advertising services, supported by a diversified ecosystem of products and subsidiaries such as YouTube and Android. Revenue streams are primarily advertising-based, supplemented by cloud services and hardware sales. Target customers range from individual users to enterprises globally. Strategic partnerships and acquisitions enhance Google's innovation and market reach, reinforcing its leadership in technology and internet services.

Security posture

Google exhibits a high level of security maturity, employing industry best practices such as HTTPS enforcement, strict content security policies, and secure cookie handling. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analyzed content. Privacy policies and cookie consent mechanisms indicate compliance with GDPR and other regulations. Incident response contact details are not publicly visible, which is common for large enterprises managing security through dedicated internal channels. The security culture is evident in the comprehensive implementation of security headers and privacy controls, minimizing risk exposure.

Recommendations

  1. Maintain rigorous monitoring and patch management to address emerging vulnerabilities promptly.
  2. Enhance public visibility of incident response contacts or security reporting channels to improve transparency.
  3. Regularly review and update privacy and cookie policies to reflect evolving regulatory requirements.
  4. Continue investment in accessibility and mobile optimization to sustain excellent user experience.
  5. Strengthen user education on privacy and security features to build further trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Google LLC
Description
Google LLC operates a global search engine and provides a wide range of internet-related services and products including advertising technologies, cloud computing, software, and hardware.
Key services
Search engine, Advertising, Cloud services, Software products
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Fonts, SVG, HTML5, CSS3
Frameworks
Google internal frameworks (proprietary)
Platforms
Web
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
95/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure cookies
  • Content Security Policy
  • No exposed sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads
Marketing tools
Google Ads, Google Marketing Platform
Transparency
excellent

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges
  2. Content is professional, comprehensive, and well-structured
  3. Strong security posture with modern best practices implemented
  4. Clear privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed on homepage
  6. Extensive use of Google proprietary technologies and infrastructure
  7. Multiple external links to official Google properties and services
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a proprietary technology stack optimized for performance and scalability, hosted on Google Cloud Platform. It uses modern web standards including HTML5, CSS3, SVG, and advanced JavaScript frameworks. The site demonstrates excellent load times and mobile responsiveness, with structured data and SEO meta tags properly implemented. Accessibility features are integrated, supporting diverse user needs. Technical debt appears minimal, with continuous updates and optimizations evident. The infrastructure supports high availability and security, aligning with Google's global service 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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 80/100Low22 findingsView report
  2. 80/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with google.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 google.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.