Skip to main content

Security report for greenlabelservice.nl

Green Label Service · Hospitality · Netherlands

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and Network security.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Green Label Service is a Dutch sustainability consultancy specializing in guiding hotels and organizations towards achieving green certifications such as Green Globe and Green Key. Founded in 2018, the company operates within the hospitality sector, offering consultancy and audit services to help clients improve their sustainability performance and obtain recognized green labels. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence, targeting hospitality businesses seeking environmental certifications. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Divi theme and Yoast SEO plugin, with modern web fonts and cookie consent mechanisms implemented. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and DNSSEC enabled, though there is room for improvement in security headers and explicit security policies. Privacy compliance is basic, with a cookie banner present but no visible privacy or terms of service pages. Overall, the website is functional, well-structured, and trustworthy, though it lacks some compliance documentation and explicit contact details.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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 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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching greenlabelservice.nl

This scan found 24 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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
83
Average
56

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 greenlabelservice.nl, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for greenlabelservice.nl 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 company occupies a niche market in sustainability consultancy for the hospitality industry, leveraging recognized green certification programs to differentiate its services. Its business model centers on consultancy and audit services, likely generating revenue through project-based engagements with hotels and organizations aiming to improve their environmental footprint. The presence of social media links indicates an active digital marketing approach. The domain age and WHOIS data align with the company's founding date, supporting legitimacy. The website's content quality and SEO optimization suggest a focus on attracting relevant clients. However, the absence of detailed contact information and compliance documents may limit trust for some visitors. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the provided data.

Security posture

The website benefits from HTTPS encryption and DNSSEC, which are strong indicators of secure domain and transport layers. However, the lack of detected security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others suggests potential improvements in hardening the web server against common web attacks. No forms or input fields were detected in the analyzed content, reducing immediate risk from input-based vulnerabilities, but also limiting user interaction. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could be a gap in security transparency. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing additional HTTP security headers and publishing security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance web security.
  3. Provide explicit contact information including company email and phone numbers to facilitate communication and support.
  4. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies to demonstrate security maturity and transparency.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and plugins to avoid vulnerabilities and ensure performance.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Green Label Service
Description
Uw organisatie verduurzamen? Uw hotel een green label/keurmerk zoals Green Globe en Green Key? Wij begeleiden u naar het beste resultaat!
Key services
Sustainability consultancy, Audits, Guidance for green labels and certifications such as Green Globe and Green Key
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Divi Theme, Yoast SEO, Google Fonts, CookieYes (cookie consent), jQuery (custom usage)
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • DNSSEC enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS and DNSSEC, indicating good security baseline
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage or metadata
  3. Cookie consent implemented via CookieYes with visible scripts
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided HTML snippet
  5. Social media presence on LinkedIn and Instagram confirmed via JSON-LD
  6. Website built on WordPress with Divi theme and Yoast SEO plugin
  7. No visible forms detected in the provided HTML content
  8. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  9. No incident response or security contact information found
  10. Content is in Dutch with English alternate language version
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a widely used CMS (WordPress) with the Divi theme and Yoast SEO plugin, indicating a modern and SEO-friendly infrastructure. Use of Google Fonts and CookieYes for cookie consent shows integration of common web services. The site appears mobile optimized with responsive design elements. Performance is moderate, with no explicit indicators of slow loading but also no advanced performance optimizations detected. Accessibility is basic, with standard HTML semantics but no advanced ARIA or accessibility features noted. The technical stack is standard for small to medium-sized consultancy websites, with opportunities for modernization in security and compliance features.
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 greenlabelservice.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 greenlabelservice.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.