Skip to main content

Security report for has-to-be.com

ChargePoint, Inc. · Energy · Germany

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

ChargePoint, Inc. operates the be.ENERGISED platform, a modular SaaS solution designed to support businesses in building and expanding electric vehicle (EV) charging services. The website targets enterprises, fleet operators, partners, and EV drivers primarily in Germany and Europe, offering comprehensive services including charge point operation, software integration, billing, roaming, and white-label solutions. The company holds a strong market position with significant penetration among Fortune 50 companies and a large active charging network. Technically, the site is built on Drupal 10 and hosted on Pantheon, with integrations such as Google Tag Manager and Google Maps API enhancing functionality. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support is a critical security gap, despite the presence of some security headers and GDPR-compliant privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site demonstrates high content quality and business credibility but requires urgent improvements in security infrastructure to protect user data and maintain trust.

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

6 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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 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 has-to-be.com

This scan found 18 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
0
Security headers
35
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
48

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

ChargePoint's business model focuses on providing a scalable, modular software platform for EV charging management, targeting multiple customer segments including businesses, fleets, and partners. The platform supports interoperability, flexible tariff management, and customer data ownership, positioning ChargePoint as a leader in the European EV charging market. The company leverages partnerships and offers extensive support services, including training and customer hotlines. The website content reflects a mature marketing strategy with clear calls to action and multilingual support. The domain and DNS records align well with the business claims, reinforcing legitimacy. The absence of physical addresses or phone numbers on the site suggests a digital-first engagement model, relying on online forms and partner portals.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and no HTTPS support, exposing users to potential data interception risks. While some security headers like HSTS and X-Content-Type-Options are present, their configurations are minimal and insufficient. No advanced security mechanisms such as OCSP stapling or session resumption are enabled. The site does not provide visible incident response contacts or a security.txt file, limiting transparency in vulnerability management. Despite no detected vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or POODLE, the missing HTTPS is a critical issue that undermines overall security. Privacy compliance is strong with GDPR-aligned policies and cookie consent mechanisms in place.

Recommendations

  1. Install and properly configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enhance HSTS policy by increasing max-age, enabling includeSubDomains, and submitting for preload.
  3. Implement a security.txt file and publish clear incident response and vulnerability disclosure policies.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve TLS performance and security.
  5. Regularly audit and update security headers and ensure all third-party scripts are secure and up to date.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern CMS (Drupal 10) and is hosted on Pantheon, indicating a robust infrastructure. Integration with Google Tag Manager and Google Maps API supports analytics and location-based services. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features, though accessibility is rated basic. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance metrics were not provided, but the presence of multiple CSS and JS files suggests moderate complexity. The lack of HTTPS is a significant technical debt and risk. Overall, the technical stack is modern but requires urgent security upgrades to align with best practices.
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 has-to-be.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 has-to-be.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.