Skip to main content

Security report for gwproject.eu

Centre for Modern Education · Education · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 2 other checks.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Green Wheels Project website represents a European Union funded educational initiative focused on enhancing quality and innovation in education related to sustainable transportation. The project is managed or associated with the Centre for Modern Education, a small-sized organization based in the Czech Republic. The website provides project results, news, partner information, and educational resources targeting educational institutions and EU stakeholders. Technically, the site uses a standard web technology stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google Analytics, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is basic with HTTPS enabled but lacking advanced security headers and visible privacy or cookie policies. The site is accessible without WAF or blocking mechanisms and shows moderate user tracking via Google Analytics. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security hardening.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

10 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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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"

    • 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';…

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

Keep watching gwproject.eu

This scan found 27 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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
55

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 project operates as a non-profit educational initiative funded by the EU, targeting education and transportation sectors. Its market position is niche, focusing on EU education stakeholders and partners. The business model revolves around collaborative project work, dissemination of educational content, and partner engagement. Revenue streams are likely grant-based with no commercial sales evident. The partnership ecosystem includes LMS hosting and the Centre for Modern Education. Growth indicators include multiple project meetings and active social media presence. Strategic observations suggest a stable but small-scale operation with opportunities to improve digital maturity and compliance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security maturity level with HTTPS enabled and no visible exposed sensitive data. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS, which are critical for modern web security. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, indicating limited readiness for security incidents. Privacy compliance is weak with no visible privacy or cookie policies and no consent mechanisms, which may expose the project to GDPR compliance risks. The use of Google Analytics introduces moderate user tracking without clear privacy disclosures. Overall, the security posture is functional but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and prominently display a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent banner to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Establish and publish an incident response contact channel and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve security transparency and readiness.
  4. Conduct a security audit of third-party libraries and update any outdated components to reduce vulnerability risks.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization to improve user experience and search engine visibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Centre for Modern Education
Description
Green Wheels Project is an EU education initiative focused on improving quality and efficiency in education and training, enhancing creativity and innovation, with a focus on sustainable transportation and green mobility.
Key services
Educational resources, Project documentation, Partner collaboration, News and updates
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap, Nivo Slider, Owl Carousel, Font Awesome, Google Fonts, Google Analytics
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No visible exposed sensitive data

Analytics and tracking

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

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is an EU educational project site focused on sustainable transportation.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found on homepage.
  3. Contact information is present but limited to email and phone in footer.
  4. No visible security policy or incident response information.
  5. Uses common web technologies and Google Analytics for tracking.
  6. No WAF or blocking detected; site fully accessible.
  7. WHOIS data is minimal but domain age aligns with project history.
  8. No forms detected on homepage; minimal data collection visible.
  9. No explicit GDPR compliance mechanisms visible.
  10. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a conventional technology stack with jQuery, Bootstrap, and various UI libraries such as Nivo Slider and Owl Carousel. Google Fonts and Font Awesome are used for styling and icons. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are integrated for user tracking. The site is moderately performant with good mobile responsiveness but lacks advanced accessibility features. No CMS or hosting provider details are evident from the HTML. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from modernization and improved security configurations.
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 gwproject.eu. 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 gwproject.eu.

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.