Skip to main content

Security report for greatbritishentrepreneurawards.com

Great British Entrepreneur Awards · Media · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Great British Entrepreneur Awards is a well-established UK-based event organization that celebrates entrepreneurship across the United Kingdom. Known as 'The Grammys of Entrepreneurship', it has been active since 2012 and offers awards, community engagement, sponsorship opportunities, and event ticket sales. The website targets entrepreneurs and the business community, positioning itself as a key player in the UK entrepreneurial ecosystem. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Plot Bella theme and integrates multiple marketing and analytics tools such as HubSpot, Facebook Pixel, and Google Analytics. The site is mobile-optimized and provides a good user experience with professional branding and consistent content quality. Security-wise, the site uses HTTPS and some best practices but lacks explicit security headers and a formal security policy or incident response information. Privacy compliance is basic with presence of privacy and cookie policies but no detailed GDPR compliance indicators or data protection officer information. Overall, the website is credible and trustworthy but could improve its security posture and compliance transparency.

Scanned

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

5 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 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  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

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

Keep watching greatbritishentrepreneurawards.com

This scan found 22 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
73
Average
58

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

The business operates in the media and non-profit sectors, focusing on entrepreneurship awards and community building. It leverages partnerships with various organizations and sponsors to enhance its market position. The business model relies on event ticket sales, sponsorships, and community engagement. The presence of multiple partner domains indicates a strong ecosystem. The company targets UK entrepreneurs and business professionals, maintaining a medium-sized operation with a history dating back to 2012. The website content and social media presence support its credibility and market reach.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no visible exposed sensitive data. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which are critical for mitigating common web vulnerabilities. There is no visible security policy, incident response contact, or vulnerability disclosure mechanism, which are important for compliance and trust. The use of multiple third-party scripts increases the attack surface and requires regular auditing. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be significantly improved with better header implementation and formal security documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosures.
  4. Conduct regular security audits of third-party scripts and plugins.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance by detailing GDPR measures and appointing a Data Protection Officer if applicable.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Great British Entrepreneur Awards
Description
The Allica Bank Great British Entrepreneur Awards (GBEA) celebrates and champions the stories of entrepreneurs from across the United Kingdom.
Key services
Entrepreneur awards, Community engagement, Sponsorship opportunities, Event ticket sales
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, HubSpot, Viral Loops, Wisepops, Senja Widget, Elfsight Widgets, Beehiiv Newsletter Embed
Frameworks
Plot Bella (WordPress theme)
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of analytics and tracking scripts with async loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, HubSpot Analytics, Customer.io
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
GoTrack
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, Google Analytics (via GTM), HubSpot Analytics, Customer.io Analytics, Wisepops
Marketing tools
HubSpot, Viral Loops, Beehiiv, Senja Widget, Elfsight Widgets, Wisepops
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-branded
  2. Content is rich and relevant to UK entrepreneurs
  3. Multiple social media and partner links enhance trust
  4. Use of multiple third-party marketing and analytics tools
  5. No visible security policy or incident response information
  6. Privacy and cookie policies present but basic
  7. No terms of service page detected
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found
  9. No explicit security headers detected in HTML content
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern WordPress CMS with a custom theme (Plot Bella) and integrates a variety of marketing and analytics tools such as HubSpot, Viral Loops, Wisepops, and Facebook Pixel. The site loads asynchronously for many scripts, aiding performance. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO meta tags are properly set. However, there is no explicit information about hosting provider or CDN usage. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. The site shows moderate performance with room for optimization. Technical debt appears low but security-related technical improvements are needed.
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 greatbritishentrepreneurawards.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 greatbritishentrepreneurawards.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.