Skip to main content

Security report for hhdelfland.nl

Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland · Government · Netherlands

Low risk. 3 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

79/100

Risk levelLow

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

Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland is a Dutch governmental water authority responsible for water management, including water purification, dike maintenance, and water level regulation within its jurisdiction. The organization serves residents and stakeholders in the Delfland region, focusing on ensuring safe, clean, and sustainable water environments. The website reflects a mature public service entity with a clear mission and comprehensive service offerings related to water management and environmental stewardship. Technically, the website is built on the iprox CMS platform, utilizing modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery UI and Slick Carousel for UI components and Piwik PRO for privacy-conscious analytics. The site is mobile-optimized, accessible, and SEO-friendly, with a professional design and clear navigation structure. Security practices include HTTPS enforcement and CSRF protection on forms, although some security headers could be enhanced for better protection. From a security perspective, the site demonstrates a solid posture with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear privacy and cookie policies and a consent mechanism. However, explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not found, which could be improved to enhance transparency and readiness. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professionally maintained, and aligned with the organization's public service role. Strategic recommendations include improving security headers, publishing a security policy, and adding a vulnerability disclosure mechanism to further strengthen security and compliance posture.

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. 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

  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.

    • 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching hhdelfland.nl

This scan found 17 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
57
Security headers
90
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
79

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

Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland occupies a critical niche as a regional water authority in the Netherlands, providing essential public services related to water safety, quality, and environmental management. Its business model is government-funded, focusing on regulatory compliance, infrastructure maintenance, and community engagement. The organization leverages digital channels to inform and serve its constituents, with a strong emphasis on transparency and public interaction through incident reporting and service requests. The website supports this model by offering detailed information, interactive maps, and access to services such as permits and incident reporting. The presence on multiple social media platforms indicates an active engagement strategy. The organization’s long history and established domain reinforce its market position and credibility. There is no indication of commercial revenue streams; the focus is on public service delivery and regulatory compliance.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is robust, with HTTPS enforced site-wide and secure form handling using CSRF tokens. The use of Piwik PRO analytics suggests a privacy-aware approach to user tracking. However, the absence of explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents an area for improvement. No signs of malware, phishing, or exposed credentials were detected. The lack of a published security policy or incident response contact limits transparency and may impact incident handling efficiency. Compliance with GDPR is evident through clear privacy and cookie policies and consent mechanisms. The site does not expose sensitive data in its HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is good but could benefit from formalizing security governance and vulnerability disclosure processes.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Referrer-Policy to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and incident response procedures to improve transparency and trust.
  3. Add a security.txt file or equivalent vulnerability disclosure mechanism to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate risks from vulnerabilities.
  5. Provide clear contact details for the Data Protection Officer or security team to support GDPR compliance and incident management.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland
Description
Bij het Hoogheemraadschap van Delfland nemen we de zorg voor het water op ons. Zodat jij samen met alle inwoners van ons gebied fijn kunt wonen, werken én ontspannen in deze prachtige waterrijke omgeving.
Key services
Waterzuivering, Waterpeilbeheer, Dijken en duinen onderhoud, Recreatie en educatie over water, Vergunningverlening
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
iprox CMS, jQuery UI, Slick Carousel, Piwik PRO Analytics
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of CSRF tokens in forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Piwik PRO
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Piwik PRO
Marketing tools
Piwik PRO Tag Manager
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a public governmental water management entity site.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. Multiple official social media channels linked.
  4. Cookie consent and privacy policies are clearly implemented.
  5. No signs of blocking or WAF interference.
  6. Security headers could be improved for enhanced protection.
  7. No explicit incident response or security policy pages found.
  8. No visible phone numbers or physical addresses in the HTML content.
  9. Forms use CSRF tokens indicating secure form handling.
  10. Use of Piwik PRO analytics indicates privacy-conscious tracking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the iprox CMS platform, leveraging modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery UI and Slick Carousel for interactive UI elements. Analytics are handled via Piwik PRO, indicating a preference for privacy-focused tracking solutions. The site is mobile responsive and accessible, with good SEO practices including meta tags and Open Graph data. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized images. There is no evidence of legacy or vulnerable libraries. The technical infrastructure supports a professional and user-friendly experience but could be enhanced by adopting additional security headers and formalizing security governance. Hosting details are not explicitly identified, but the domain and content delivery appear stable and reliable.
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 hhdelfland.nl. 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 hhdelfland.nl.

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.