Skip to main content

Security report for hgl-law.com

Hollander, Goode & Lopez, PLLC · Real Estate · United States

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Hollander, Goode & Lopez, PLLC is a small, full-service law firm specializing in civil, condominium, real estate, and family law serving Broward, Palm Beach, and Miami-Dade counties in Florida. The firm emphasizes client-focused legal representation and offers a broad range of services including homeowner and condominium association representation, corporate law, bankruptcy creditor representation, civil litigation, and family law matters. The website is professionally designed using GoDaddy's Website Builder platform, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security measures include HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA on the contact form, but lack advanced security headers and privacy compliance documentation. The domain is registered with GoDaddy since 2016, consistent with the firm's founding and business claims, indicating legitimacy. However, the absence of privacy and cookie policies represents a compliance gap. Overall, the website presents a trustworthy and professional image suitable for its target audience.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
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

3 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  3. 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

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

Keep watching hgl-law.com

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
67
Security headers
45
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
73

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.

Brand lookalikes

Add-on

Domains that imitate hgl-law.com and could be used for phishing or spoofed email, tracked in OffSeq Breach.

Tracked
15
Registered
15
Resolving
15
High or critical
0

Last checked 2026-06-20

Masked preview

  • jg•••••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • ho•••••.comMediumbitsquatting
  • hl••••.comMediumomission

See the full lookalike list

A one-off add-on that lists up to 20 of the highest-risk lookalikes of hgl-law.com with registration, mail-server, certificate and DNS signals.

Select it in the checkout above.

Lookalike data refreshes continuously. Monitoring on Breach alerts you when a variant is registered, gains a mail server or starts serving HTTPS.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The firm operates in the legal services sector with a focus on real estate and civil law within South Florida. Its business model is service-oriented, targeting individuals and organizations requiring legal assistance in specific areas. The firm maintains certifications and affiliations that enhance its credibility. The website content and domain registration align well, supporting a stable market position as a regional law firm. No evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries was found. The firm relies on direct client engagement through contact forms and phone communication. Growth indicators or revenue streams are not disclosed on the website.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and uses Google reCAPTCHA to protect its contact form from spam. However, it lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options, which could improve protection against common web attacks. DNSSEC is not enabled, which is a missed opportunity for domain security enhancement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, limiting transparency in security management. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved with standard best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR and privacy compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance web security.
  3. Enable DNSSEC for the domain to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  4. Provide incident response contact information and consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy to increase transparency and trust.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and SEO optimization to improve user experience and search engine visibility.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Hollander, Goode & Lopez, PLLC
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hollander, Goode & Lopez, PLLC
Description
Full service Civil and Condominium Lawyers serving Broward, Palm Beach and Miami Dade Counties. The firm focuses on client needs and offers legal services including homeowner association representation, condominium association representation, corporate representation, bankruptcy creditor representation, civil litigation, consumer advocacy, contracts, family law, real estate closings, evictions and foreclosures.
Key services
Homeowner Association Representation, Condominium Association Representation, Corporate Representation, Bankruptcy - Creditor representation, Civil Litigation, Consumer Advocacy and Protection, Contracts, Divorce including Marital Settlement Agreements, Family Law, Incorporation
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
GoDaddy Website Builder, Starfield Technologies, Google Fonts (Montserrat, Roboto), reCAPTCHA
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of reCAPTCHA on contact form

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professional law firm site with clear service offerings.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. Contact form uses Google reCAPTCHA for spam protection.
  4. No security headers detected; opportunity for security improvement.
  5. Domain registration is stable and consistent with business claims.
  6. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  7. No social media links explicitly found in the HTML content provided.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on GoDaddy's Website Builder platform, utilizing Starfield Technologies and Google Fonts for typography. It uses modern web fonts (Montserrat and Roboto) and includes reCAPTCHA for form protection. Hosting is provided by GoDaddy.com, LLC, with domain registration dating back to 2016. The site is mobile optimized and has a moderate performance profile. However, the absence of security headers and DNSSEC indicates technical debt in security hardening. SEO is basic with meta tags and Open Graph data present but lacks structured data like JSON-LD. The site uses minimal external scripts primarily for UI and font loading. Overall, the technical infrastructure is adequate for a small law firm but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security 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 hgl-law.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 hgl-law.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.