Skip to main content

Security report for gwc.at

gwc · Energy · Austria

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

31/100

Risk levelHigh

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

gwc is a consulting firm specializing in business development, innovation management, and corporate finance with a focus on sectors such as energy, telecommunications, craftsmanship, and digitalization. The company supports clients in developing strategies, managing innovation portfolios, and securing public funding. The website is professionally designed using WordPress with modern plugins and offers a clear navigation structure and GDPR-compliant cookie consent. However, the site lacks HTTPS which is a significant security concern. No direct contact emails or phone numbers are provided, only a contact form. Security policies and incident response information are not published, indicating room for improvement in transparency and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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"

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

Keep watching gwc.at

This scan found 25 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
80
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
18
Average
31

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

gwc positions itself as a specialized consultancy targeting businesses seeking strategic support in innovation and financing. The presence of client logos suggests established partnerships and a credible market presence. The business model is advisory-based, focusing on tailored solutions for innovation and funding. The website content is relevant and consistent with the company's stated expertise. The lack of direct contact details may limit immediate client engagement but is mitigated by a contact form. The company appears to be a small-sized entity operating primarily in Austria.

Security posture

The website currently lacks HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No security headers were detected, and no explicit security or incident response policies are published. The cookie consent banner indicates some level of privacy compliance. The absence of direct contact emails for security incidents or abuse limits incident response readiness. Overall, the security posture is basic and requires enhancements to meet modern standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all website traffic.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  3. Publish a clear security policy and provide incident response contact channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ emails).
  4. Include direct company contact emails and phone numbers to improve trust and communication.
  5. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
gwc
Description
gwc develops solutions to help clients implement new business ideas and innovations. They offer expertise in business development, innovation management, and corporate finance including public funding and research premium applications.
Key services
Business Development, Innovation Management, Corporate Finance and Funding Application Support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, jQuery, Contact Form 7, WPBakery Page Builder, Select2, Font Awesome
Frameworks
WPBakery Page Builder
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data found

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is in German language targeting Austrian market.
  2. Content is professionally presented with clear business focus.
  3. No direct email or phone contact found on homepage; contact via form only.
  4. Cookie consent banner present indicating GDPR awareness.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. No HTTPS detected in provided URLs; site uses HTTP which is a security concern.
  7. No social media links found in the HTML content.
  8. No terms of service page detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using WPBakery Page Builder and several common plugins like Contact Form 7 and Yoast SEO. The tech stack is modern but lacks HTTPS which is critical. Performance appears moderate with standard jQuery and CSS usage. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO is supported by Yoast. Accessibility features are basic and could be improved. No advanced analytics or tracking scripts were detected, indicating minimal user tracking.
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 gwc.at. 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 gwc.at.

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.