a(a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
b(b) Incident handling: One indicator
c(c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
d(d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
e(e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
f(f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
g(g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
h(h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
i(i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
j(j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside
Partly checked
One indicator
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.
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"
This scan found 22 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.
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
77
Security headers
70
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
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
Breach exposure
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Dark web exposure
Add-on
Leaked records that mention intex-osaka.com, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for intex-osaka.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
サイトはHTTPSを適切に利用し、Google Tag ManagerやAnalyticsを通じたトラッキングも標準的に実装されています。セキュリティヘッダーの導入が見られず、これが潜在的なリスクとなっています。フォームは主に問い合わせページに分散しており、メールアドレスはJavaScriptで難読化されているため、直接的なスパムリスクは低減されています。インシデント対応や脆弱性開示のポリシーは公開されておらず、これらの整備が望まれます。全体として中程度のセキュリティ成熟度であり、改善によりリスク低減が可能です。
jQuery 3.2.1, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Slick Carousel, LazySizes, Stickyfill
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good
Security
Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
HTTPS enforced
No exposed credentials
No visible vulnerable libraries
Analytics and tracking
Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic
Advertising
Transparency
basic
Site quality
Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high
Key observations
Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
Content is rich, well-structured, and professionally presented in Japanese.
Multiple events and detailed facility information are provided.
Contact information is clearly available including phone, email (obfuscated), and physical address.
No explicit cookie policy or consent mechanism found.
Security headers are not explicitly detected in the HTML content.
Use of modern JavaScript libraries and Google Analytics for tracking.
Social media presence on Facebook and Twitter is integrated.
No visible forms collecting sensitive data on the main page; contact forms likely on separate pages.
Privacy policy and terms of service pages exist but are basic in nature.
Technical notes
Notes
ウェブサイトはjQuery 3.2.1を中心に構築され、Slick CarouselやLazySizesなどのモダンなJavaScriptライブラリを活用しています。Google Tag ManagerとGoogle Analyticsによりトラフィック解析が行われています。CMSは独自開発の可能性が高く、動的にバナーやイベント情報を管理しています。パフォーマンスは中程度であり、画像の遅延読み込みなどの最適化が施されています。モバイル対応は良好ですが、アクセシビリティ面での改善余地があります。技術的負債は少なく、今後の拡張性も確保されています。
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.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with intex-osaka.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review intex-osaka.com.