Skip to main content

Security report for iotagarden.com

IOTA · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

IOTA is a UK-based company specializing in the design and manufacture of bespoke metal planters, architectural metalwork, and landscape products primarily serving the commercial, public realm, and luxury residential sectors. Established in 2003, the company has built a trusted reputation within the UK landscape industry, working with high-profile clients and delivering complex projects. Their services include design and build contract solutions, site works, installation, and post-contract support. The website reflects a professional and well-structured digital presence with modern technologies such as HTMX, Alpine.js, and Google Tag Manager integrated for analytics and user experience enhancements. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and cookie consent implemented, but lacks visible security headers and published privacy or terms of service policies. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain legitimacy verification, though the website content and client references suggest a credible business. Strategic recommendations include publishing comprehensive privacy and security policies, enhancing security headers, and providing clear contact information to improve trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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. 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 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';…

  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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

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

Keep watching iotagarden.com

This scan found 24 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
44
Security headers
40
Email security
75
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
69

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

IOTA occupies a niche market within the UK landscape and architectural metalwork sector, targeting architects, designers, and commercial/residential clients seeking bespoke outdoor products. Their competitive advantage lies in technical expertise, bespoke design excellence, and a broad portfolio of high-profile projects. The business model focuses on bespoke manufacturing and full contract solutions including installation and post-contract services. The company demonstrates strong market positioning with trusted client relationships and partnerships with leading design firms. The website's marketing tools and analytics indicate a moderate level of digital maturity, though there is room for improvement in privacy compliance and security transparency.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and a cookie consent mechanism, indicating baseline security and privacy awareness. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces the overall security posture. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is published, and no security.txt file is present. The absence of direct contact information and privacy policy pages represents compliance gaps, particularly under GDPR. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved with standard best practices and transparency measures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages accessible from the website footer or main navigation.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Provide clear contact information including company email addresses and phone numbers to improve business credibility and user trust.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and publish a security.txt file to demonstrate proactive security management.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet compliance standards and improve user experience for all visitors.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Registration number
04334850
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
IOTA
Description
IOTA designs and manufactures bespoke metal planters, architectural metalwork and landscape products for commercial, public realm and luxury residential projects across the UK. They specialize in urban greening schemes, roof terraces, hospitality environments, and contemporary garden designs.
Key services
Bespoke metal planters, Architectural metalwork, Landscape products, Design & Build contract solutions, Site works and installation, Post-contract support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, HTMX, Alpine.js, Google Tag Manager, Termly Cookie Consent
Frameworks
HTMX, Alpine.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent banner implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Marketing tools
Termly Cookie Consent
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and images.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and reduces trust.
  3. Cookie consent banner is implemented with Termly.
  4. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in visible content.
  6. Use of modern JavaScript frameworks and GTM for analytics.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No security headers detected in provided data.
  9. Website targets UK landscape industry professionals and clients.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses modern frontend technologies including HTMX and Alpine.js for dynamic content loading and interactivity, combined with Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good SEO meta tags. Performance is moderate with progressive image loading techniques. No CMS or hosting provider information is explicitly detected. The technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced accessibility and security header configurations. The absence of server security headers and WHOIS data are notable technical gaps.
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 iotagarden.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 iotagarden.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.