Skip to main content

Security report for innocentdrinks.co.uk

Fresh Trading Limited · Retail · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

56/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Innocent Drinks, operated by Fresh Trading Limited and owned by The Coca-Cola Company, is a well-established UK-based beverage company specializing in natural and sustainable drinks such as smoothies, juices, and shots. The company positions itself strongly in the retail sector with a focus on sustainability, social responsibility, and B Corp certification, appealing to environmentally and socially conscious consumers. The website reflects this ethos with comprehensive content, clear navigation, and consistent branding. Technically, the site is built on Adobe Experience Manager and hosted on AWS CloudFront, leveraging modern cloud infrastructure and Adobe's marketing and consent management tools. However, a critical security gap exists due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS, which significantly impacts the site's security posture. Privacy and legal policies are well documented and accessible, indicating good compliance practices. Overall, the site is professional and trustworthy but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and maintain trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
33/ 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

4 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 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.

    • 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 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 innocentdrinks.co.uk

This scan found 14 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
65
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
33
Average
56

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

The company operates in the retail beverage sector with a strong sustainability and social impact focus, leveraging its B Corp status as a competitive advantage. Its business model integrates product sales with environmental and social initiatives, including profit donations and sustainable factory investments. The parent company relationship with Coca-Cola provides financial backing and market reach. The website supports brand engagement through social media and detailed content about products and corporate responsibility. The digital presence is mature, using enterprise-grade CMS and marketing tools, indicating a strategic approach to customer engagement and compliance.

Security posture

The website demonstrates basic security best practices through HTTP headers like XSS protection, frame options, and content type options. However, the lack of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support is a critical vulnerability that exposes users to potential data interception and undermines trust. Other security features such as OCSP stapling, session resumption, and advanced TLS protocols are absent, indicating room for improvement. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is publicly available, which could be enhanced to improve transparency and readiness. Privacy compliance is supported by clear policies and cookie consent mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and security features like OCSP stapling and session resumption.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to enhance transparency and security culture.
  4. Provide explicit contact information for security incidents and data protection officers to improve incident response readiness.
  5. Continue enhancing accessibility and mobile optimization to improve user experience and compliance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Adobe Experience Manager, hosted on AWS CloudFront CDN, and uses Adobe Launch for tag management and OneTrust for cookie consent. The technical stack is modern and enterprise-grade, supporting scalability and marketing needs. Performance data is unavailable, but the use of preloading and deferred scripts suggests optimization efforts. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features, though some improvements could be made. The absence of HTTPS is a major technical risk. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data, though some OG fields are empty. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires urgent security upgrades.
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 innocentdrinks.co.uk. 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 innocentdrinks.co.uk.

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.