Skip to main content

Security report for gruntodnowa.pl

Grunt od nowa · Other · Poland

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Grunt od nowa is a Polish website built on WordPress, primarily targeting a Polish-speaking audience. The site appears to be a small-scale business or project launched around 2022, with basic content and SEO optimization via Yoast SEO. The presence of Cookiebot indicates an awareness of cookie consent and privacy compliance, although no explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages were found in the analyzed content. The website uses Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager for traffic analysis and marketing purposes. Technically, the site employs standard web technologies including jQuery and asynchronous script loading for performance. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and cookie consent implemented, but lacks visible security headers and detailed security policies.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
100/ 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

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. 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

  3. 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 gruntodnowa.pl

This scan found 21 issues across 5 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
100
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

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 behind gruntodnowa.pl is not explicitly detailed on the site, with minimal descriptive content and no clear contact information or certifications. The domain WHOIS data is unavailable, which raises concerns about transparency and trustworthiness. The site likely serves a niche or local audience in Poland, but lacks visible business credentials or detailed service descriptions. The use of common web technologies and marketing tools suggests a standard digital presence without advanced integrations or partnerships. No related or partner domains were identified from the content.

Security posture

The website benefits from HTTPS encryption and a cookie consent mechanism, which are positive indicators for user privacy and security. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The lack of explicit security or incident response policies and contact channels indicates a low maturity in security governance. Regular updates and security audits are recommended to improve resilience.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages to improve transparency and compliance.
  2. Add security headers to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish clear contact information including company emails and phone numbers to improve business credibility.
  4. Conduct regular security assessments and update WordPress and plugins promptly.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to foster trust and responsible reporting.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Grunt od nowa
Description
Just another WordPress site
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, Cookiebot, Google Tag Manager, jQuery
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is built on WordPress with Yoast SEO and Cookiebot for cookie consent.
  2. No WHOIS data available from NASK registry for .pl domain.
  3. Cookie consent banner is active and configured with multiple consent categories.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected in the provided content.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the HTML content.
  6. No social media links detected in the provided content.
  7. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager scripts are present for analytics.
  8. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL is enabled.
  9. Website content is in Polish language targeting Polish audience.
  10. No signs of WAF or content blocking detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.3 with Yoast SEO plugin version 25.4, indicating a modern CMS setup with SEO capabilities. Cookiebot is integrated for cookie consent management, reflecting GDPR awareness. Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics scripts are used for analytics and marketing tracking. The site loads jQuery and related scripts asynchronously to optimize performance. The CSS and JavaScript assets are properly linked and appear to be up to date. Mobile optimization is good, with viewport meta tags and responsive styles. Accessibility is basic but present. No advanced frameworks or hosting provider details were identified. Performance is moderate based on script usage and asset loading patterns.
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 gruntodnowa.pl. 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 gruntodnowa.pl.

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.