Skip to main content

Security report for ifbt.eu

International Beach Tennis IFBT · Other · Spain

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 1 other check.

Security score

36/100

Risk levelHigh

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

International Beach Tennis IFBT is a small, specialized sports federation focused on promoting and organizing beach tennis events globally. The organization operates a multilingual WordPress website providing comprehensive event information, player rankings, and membership services. The technical infrastructure is based on WordPress with several plugins and a custom theme, hosted by CDmon in Spain. While the website content and business information are well presented and consistent with the organization's mission, the security posture is weak due to lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of modern TLS protocols. Privacy compliance is addressed with clear policies and consent mechanisms. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance 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

8 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. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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 ifbt.eu

This scan found 21 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
50
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
18
Average
36

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 · found on this site
  • 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

IFBT holds a niche position as an international governing body for beach tennis, leveraging partnerships with recognized sports organizations such as ISCA, TAFISA, and IFMST. The business model is non-profit and community-focused, targeting players, clubs, and sports enthusiasts worldwide. Revenue streams likely include memberships, event registrations, and sponsorships. The website supports multilingual content and integrates social media channels to engage its audience. Growth indicators include active event promotion and strategic partnerships. The organization maintains a consistent brand and provides trust signals through official social media and policy disclosures.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, exposing the site to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. Security headers are minimal, and advanced protections like HSTS and OCSP stapling are not implemented. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are evident. However, SPF and DMARC DNS records are properly configured, reducing email spoofing risks. The site uses secure forms but lacks visible security certifications or frameworks. Immediate remediation is required to enable HTTPS and strengthen security headers to protect users and maintain compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and 1.3) and disable deprecated versions.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Add comprehensive security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  5. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact channels.
  6. Regularly audit and update plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  7. Enhance privacy policy with explicit GDPR compliance statements and data retention details.
  8. Improve website performance metrics and monitor loading times.
  9. Consider adding terms of service and security policy pages for transparency.
  10. Maintain consistent branding and expand trust indicators such as certifications or testimonials.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with the Avada theme and Fusion Builder framework, utilizing plugins such as Yoast SEO, Instagram Feed, Visual Form Builder, and WPML for multilingual support. The hosting provider is CDmon, with DNS records properly configured including SPF and DMARC for email security. The site uses jQuery and various JavaScript libraries for UI enhancements. Performance data is missing, but the page size and resource count indicate potential issues or incomplete metrics. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO is enhanced by Yoast plugin and proper meta tags. However, the lack of SSL and disabled TLS protocols represent significant technical risks. The site architecture supports rich content and interactive elements but requires modernization of security and performance aspects.
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 ifbt.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 ifbt.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.