Skip to main content

Security report for grosvenor.com

Grosvenor · Real Estate · N/a

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

82/100

Risk levelLow

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

Grosvenor is a global property group specializing in urban property, rural estates, food and AgTech investments, social enterprise, and philanthropy. The website reflects a mature business with a diversified portfolio and a focus on social impact. Technically, the site uses modern analytics and consent management tools such as Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Cookiebot, hosted likely behind Cloudflare. The site is well-structured, mobile-optimized, and uses HTTPS, indicating a good level of digital maturity. Security posture is solid with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms, but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies. The absence of WHOIS data and privacy policy links slightly reduces trustworthiness. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but could improve transparency and security documentation.

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

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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  2. 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 grosvenor.com

This scan found 15 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
82
Security headers
45
Email security
98
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
82

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

Grosvenor operates in the real estate sector with a focus on diversified property investments and social enterprise. Their business model includes managing urban and rural properties, investing in food and AgTech, and engaging in philanthropy. The website targets investors, partners, and stakeholders interested in property and social impact. The company appears large and established, though domain registration details are missing. The use of advanced analytics and consent tools suggests a commitment to data-driven decision-making and regulatory compliance. No direct contact details or security incident channels are provided, indicating room for improvement in customer and partner engagement.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses cookie consent with granular user controls, which is positive for privacy compliance. However, no explicit security headers were detected in the HTML content, and there is no published security policy or incident response contact information. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the content. The lack of WHOIS data and security.txt file reduces transparency and trust. Overall, the security posture is moderate, with good encryption and privacy tools but lacking in documented security governance and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service accessible from the homepage.
  2. Add explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options.
  3. Provide clear contact information for security incidents and data protection inquiries, including a security@ or abuse@ email.
  4. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  5. Verify and update WHOIS registration details to improve domain trustworthiness and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Grosvenor
Description
Grosvenor is a global property group with a focus on urban property, food & AgTech, rural estates, philanthropy, and social enterprise. They provide diversified property investments and manage various estates and social impact initiatives.
Key services
Urban Property Investment, Food & AgTech Investment, Rural Estate Management, Social Enterprise Initiatives, Philanthropy
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot, Cloudflare (implied by cookies), ShareThis
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with granular controls
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Google
Marketing tools
ShareThis
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses HTTPS and modern analytics and consent tools.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual for a corporate domain.
  3. Cookie consent is implemented with detailed categories and third-party providers.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service links found in the provided content.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  6. Website content is professional and well-structured with clear navigation.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy detected.
  8. No explicit security or incident response contact information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot for consent management, and likely Cloudflare for hosting and security. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible with good SEO practices. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized images. No CMS or backend platform was explicitly detected from the HTML content. The site could benefit from additional security headers and improved documentation of security and privacy policies to reduce technical risk and improve compliance posture.
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 grosvenor.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 grosvenor.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.