Skip to main content

Security report for gsdb.de

GS data business OHG · Technology · Germany

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

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

GS data business OHG is a small IT system house based in Aurich, Ostfriesland, Germany, offering comprehensive IT services including IT service, telecommunication, IT security, ERP solutions, time tracking, and document management systems. The company targets businesses and organizations seeking reliable IT system house solutions. The website is professionally designed using WordPress with Astra theme and includes SEO optimizations and structured data for enhanced search engine visibility. The technical infrastructure is modern, leveraging popular plugins and Matomo analytics with privacy-conscious settings. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and no exposed sensitive data, though the absence of security headers and incident response information suggests room for improvement. Overall, the website is trustworthy and well-positioned in its local market segment.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
85/ 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. 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. 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 gsdb.de

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. 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
85
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
85
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 gsdb.de, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
1
Employees
0
Customers
0
Third parties
1
Weak passwords
0%

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for gsdb.de.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

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 operates as a specialized IT system house serving a regional market in Germany, focusing on IT infrastructure, security, and business process solutions. Its business model revolves around providing tailored IT services and solutions to local enterprises. The presence of social media links and structured data indicates a professional approach to digital presence. The lack of detailed WHOIS registrant information slightly reduces transparency but does not raise significant concerns. The company appears to maintain a moderate digital maturity with opportunities to enhance compliance and security disclosures.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security posture with HTTPS enforced and privacy-aware analytics configuration. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of published security policies or incident response contacts indicate gaps in security maturity. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The company should consider implementing additional security best practices and transparency measures to strengthen trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers like Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to demonstrate security readiness and transparency.
  4. Include clear contact emails for security and general inquiries to facilitate communication and trust.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party plugins and scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
GS data business OHG
Description
360° Service und Support Willkommen bei GS data business, Ihrem verlässlichen IT-Systemhaus in Aurich, Ostfriesland. Wir bieten umfassende IT-Systemhauslösungen und […]
Key services
IT-Service, Telekommunikation, IT-Sicherheit, ERP-Lösung, Zeiterfassung, DMS / ECM-System
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Astra Theme, Yoast SEO, Ultimate Addons for Gutenberg, jQuery, Matomo Analytics
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Matomo with DoNotTrack enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge.
  2. Content is professional and relevant to IT system house services.
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found on the homepage HTML.
  4. Contact information includes phone and modal contact forms but no explicit email addresses visible.
  5. Use of modern WordPress theme and plugins with SEO optimization.
  6. Matomo analytics used with DoNotTrack enabled, indicating privacy awareness.
  7. No visible security headers detected in HTML source.
  8. Social media presence on Facebook and LinkedIn linked.
  9. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the Astra theme and several plugins including Yoast SEO and Ultimate Addons for Gutenberg, indicating a modern and flexible CMS infrastructure. The use of Matomo analytics with DoNotTrack enabled shows attention to user privacy. The site is mobile optimized and has good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Performance is moderate with room for optimization. No hosting provider details were found in the HTML. The technical setup is solid but could benefit from enhanced security headers and improved accessibility 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 gsdb.de. 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 gsdb.de.

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.