Skip to main content

Security report for inspe.com

InSpe.com · Manufacturing · N/a

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

44/100

Risk levelHigh

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

InSpe.com is a medium-sized holding company with a history dating back to 1991, operating across multiple countries and industries including development, manufacturing, and trading. The company has established several subsidiaries and brands, positioning itself as a significant player in its sectors. The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using Elementor, with a moderate performance profile and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled and no exposed sensitive data, but lacks advanced DNS security and security headers. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism or explicit GDPR compliance indicators. Contact information is primarily via a contact form, with no direct emails or phone numbers listed. Social media presence is active on Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but could improve in privacy and security practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching inspe.com

This scan found 30 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
53
Average
44

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

The company operates as a holding entity with subsidiaries focused on development, manufacturing, and trading, serving diverse market demands. It has a clear business model centered on full-chain control and cost efficiency. Market positioning is strong with presence in four countries and multiple brands. The website content and structure support business credibility, showcasing portfolio projects and news updates. The company leverages digital marketing tools like Google Analytics and MonsterInsights for user tracking and insights. Growth indicators include recent expansion into Israel and ongoing product innovation. The partnership ecosystem is not explicitly detailed but subsidiaries and portfolio brands are highlighted.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no visible sensitive data leaks. However, the absence of DNSSEC and security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security represents gaps. No incident response or security policy information is provided, limiting transparency. The use of Google Analytics includes an opt-out mechanism, indicating some privacy awareness. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files were found. Overall, the security posture is functional but could be enhanced to meet higher compliance and protection standards.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to enhance DNS security and prevent spoofing
  2. Implement standard security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security
  3. Add a cookie consent banner to comply with privacy regulations and improve user transparency
  4. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to build trust
  5. Regularly review and update third-party plugins and scripts to mitigate vulnerabilities
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
InSpe.com
Description
InSpe started as a humble family business and has since evolved into a diverse holding company, encompassing multiple companies across various industries. Driven by a commitment to expansion and expertise, InSpe has broadened its scope to become a well-rounded holding company, offering a wide range of products and services to cater to diverse market demands.
Key services
Development, Manufacturing, Trading
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Bootstrap, jQuery, Google Analytics
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data detected
  • Use of Google Analytics with opt-out mechanism

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
MonsterInsights
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia
  2. No WAF or security challenge detected
  3. Uses modern WordPress CMS with Elementor builder
  4. No explicit cookie consent banner found
  5. Privacy policy present but basic and no clear GDPR compliance indicators
  6. Contact information mainly via contact form; no explicit emails or phone numbers found
  7. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube
  8. No visible security headers detected
  9. DNSSEC not enabled which is a minor security gap
  10. Google Analytics used with opt-out mechanism implemented
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder, leveraging Bootstrap and jQuery libraries. Hosting is supported by Cloudflare DNS services, though DNSSEC is not enabled. Google Analytics is integrated for tracking with an opt-out mechanism. The site shows good mobile responsiveness and moderate loading performance. SEO metadata and Open Graph tags are present but robots meta tag is set to noindex,nofollow which may limit search engine indexing. Accessibility features are basic. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance optimizations.
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 inspe.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 inspe.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.