Skip to main content

Security report for integsoft.cz

Integsoft s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Integsoft s.r.o. is a specialized technology company focused on Java-based system integration, Big Data analytics, and secure single sign-on solutions. They offer custom software development, integration services using Mule ESB, and a proprietary product suite called Integration Eye® for monitoring and securing APIs. The company positions itself as a trusted partner with official alliances with MuleSoft and Red Hat, serving diverse sectors including banking, energy, and manufacturing. Their website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design and clear business messaging. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies and analytics tools, though some security best practices like security headers and explicit privacy policies are missing. The absence of WHOIS data reduces domain trust but does not negate the legitimacy suggested by the website content and partner relationships. Overall, the company demonstrates a solid business and technical foundation with room for improvement in security and compliance transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

    • 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

  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 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 integsoft.cz

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
72
Security headers
55
Email security
95
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
10
Average
60

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 targets enterprise clients requiring complex system integration and Java development services. Their business model combines service delivery with proprietary product offerings, enhancing recurring revenue potential. Partnerships with MuleSoft and Red Hat strengthen their market position and credibility. Client testimonials and sector diversity indicate a stable client base and industry recognition. The company emphasizes quality, education, and long-term client relationships, suggesting a sustainable growth strategy. However, the lack of visible privacy and security policies may impact trust with privacy-conscious clients. Monitoring domain registration status is recommended to ensure ongoing legitimacy.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and obfuscates email addresses to reduce spam. However, no security headers were detected, and there is no visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure information. Cookie consent is implemented, indicating some privacy awareness. The absence of a privacy policy and terms of service is a compliance gap, especially under GDPR. No forms were found on the homepage, reducing immediate attack surface, but contact forms elsewhere should be reviewed for security. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by adding security headers, publishing policies, and establishing incident response channels.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  3. Establish and publicize an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to demonstrate security maturity.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Verify and maintain accurate WHOIS domain registration data to strengthen domain legitimacy and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Integsoft s.r.o.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Integsoft s.r.o.
Description
Integsoft s.r.o. is a flexible company specializing in Java technologies, system integration, Big Data, data grids, SSO, and Java EE applications. They provide custom Java development, system integration using Mule ESB, Keycloak SSO integration, and their modular product Integration Eye® for monitoring and securing APIs and systems.
Key services
Java custom development, System integration with Mule ESB, Keycloak SSO implementation, Big Data and data analytics, Integration Eye® product suite
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Java, Mule ESB, Keycloak, Big Data technologies, Hadoop, Elasticsearch, Bootstrap, jQuery, Owl Carousel, Magnific Popup, Modernizr, Google Fonts
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Email obfuscation via JavaScript
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by external scripts and Google Analytics)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Hotjar
Marketing tools
Toastr, Owl Carousel
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and reduces domain trust.
  3. Company presents itself as a specialized technology service provider with strong partner relationships.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found on the homepage.
  5. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented.
  6. Contact information is clearly provided with multiple physical addresses and phone numbers.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools is evident.
  8. No security headers detected in provided data; potential area for improvement.
  9. No forms detected on the homepage; contact form likely on contact page.
  10. No evidence of security incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery and various plugins for UI enhancements, and Google Fonts for typography. Analytics are implemented via Google Analytics and Hotjar, enabling user behavior insights. The site is mobile-optimized with good navigation and professional content structure. Performance is moderate, likely due to multiple scripts and image assets. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or static site architecture. Hosting provider details are not available. Technical debt appears low, but improvements in accessibility and security headers would enhance overall quality and risk posture.
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 integsoft.cz. 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 integsoft.cz.

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.