Skip to main content

Security report for ictashkent.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website ictashkent.com is currently inaccessible due to a 502 Bad Gateway error served via Cloudflare, indicating an origin server failure. The page content is limited to an error message with no business or contact information, policies, or services described. This prevents a full assessment of the company's business operations, market position, or technical infrastructure. The only technology detected is Cloudflare acting as a proxy and WAF. Security posture is weak due to lack of security headers and absence of privacy or cookie policies. No forms, scripts, or analytics are present to evaluate data collection or user tracking. Overall, the site is non-functional and provides no trust or credibility signals.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

7 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"

    • 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

    • 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching ictashkent.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
75
Security headers
55
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
71

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

Due to the lack of accessible content, no business intelligence can be derived. There are no indications of company name, services, sector, or market positioning. The domain appears to be small in size but no founding year or parent company information is available. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The absence of content and policies suggests the site is either under maintenance or improperly configured.

Security posture

The security posture is minimal and currently inadequate. The site uses Cloudflare as a protective layer but suffers from a backend server error causing a 502 Bad Gateway. No security headers are detected, and no incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The lack of HTTPS details and security best practices lowers the security score. There is no evidence of GDPR compliance or data protection officer contact. The site is vulnerable to availability issues and lacks transparency in security management.

Recommendations

  1. Resolve the origin server issues causing the 502 Bad Gateway error to restore site availability.
  2. Implement and verify HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and enforce secure connections.
  3. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and other regulations.
  4. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  5. Establish clear contact information and incident response channels including abuse and security contacts.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Cloudflare detected. Page is a Cloudflare 502 Bad Gateway error page indicating origin server error; content is blocked from full analysis. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
Cloudflare
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
20/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website content is inaccessible due to 502 Bad Gateway error.
  2. Page is served via Cloudflare indicating origin server issues.
  3. No business or contact information available on the page.
  4. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  5. No forms, scripts, or analytics detected in the provided HTML.
  6. No social media or external business links except Cloudflare domain.
  7. No security headers or SSL configuration details available.
  8. Content safety is rated safe due to lack of content.
  9. Analysis incomplete due to WAF and server error blocking content.
Technical notes

Notes

The site is currently non-functional due to a server-side 502 error. The only technology detected is Cloudflare acting as a CDN and WAF. No CMS, frameworks, or analytics tools are identifiable from the provided HTML. The page lacks meta tags beyond basic charset and viewport settings. No forms or scripts are present, indicating minimal technical implementation. Performance, accessibility, and SEO cannot be assessed due to lack of content. The site requires technical remediation to restore service and enable further analysis.
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 ictashkent.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 ictashkent.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.