Skip to main content

Security report for jotron.com

Jotron · Energy · Norway

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

88/100

Risk levelLow

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

Jotron is a globally recognized provider specializing in the development, manufacturing, and marketing of advanced safety communication products and systems tailored for land, sea, and air applications. The company positions itself as a world leader in safety communication, serving critical sectors such as maritime, air traffic control, coastal operations, and energy. Their product portfolio includes maritime communication and navigation systems, radios, and recorders, emphasizing reliability and safety. The website reflects a mature digital presence with modern technologies like React and Lottie animations, supported by Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot for analytics and privacy compliance. Security practices are robust with HTTPS enforcement and cookie consent mechanisms, though some security headers could be improved. The absence of public WHOIS data slightly impacts trust but is mitigated by professional branding, partner endorsements, and comprehensive privacy policies. Overall, Jotron demonstrates a strong market position with a focus on safety, sustainability, and customer partnerships.

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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  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.

    • Medium

      Missing Permissions-Policy header

      Controls browser features and APIs

      What to do: Implement a Permissions-Policy to restrict feature access

      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Permissions-Policy: accelerometer=(), autoplay=(), camera=(), cross-origin-isolated=(),…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  3. 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.

    • Medium

      SSL Certificate Expires Within 90 Days

      SSL certificate expires in 87 days

      What to do: Plan SSL certificate renewal

  4. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035

Keep watching jotron.com

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
95
Security headers
75
Email security
93
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
88

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

Jotron operates primarily in the energy and transportation sectors, delivering essential communication solutions that enhance safety and operational efficiency. Their business model is B2B, targeting organizations requiring high-quality communication systems for critical infrastructure. The company leverages partnerships with notable industry players such as JRC, Avinor, Saab, Mackay, Furuno, and Thales, indicating a strong ecosystem and market credibility. The website content and structure suggest a medium-sized enterprise with a global footprint. Growth indicators include recent acquisitions and active participation in industry events. The company emphasizes sustainability and security, aligning with modern ESG principles. Revenue streams likely derive from product sales, service contracts, and support offerings. The digital presence supports lead generation and customer engagement through clear navigation and content relevance.

Security posture

Jotron's security posture is solid, with HTTPS enforced site-wide and a cookie consent mechanism that aligns with GDPR requirements. The website does not expose sensitive data or vulnerable libraries, and tracking is managed responsibly via Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security is a minor gap. There is no visible incident response contact or security.txt file, which could enhance transparency and readiness. The company demonstrates a commitment to security in its product offerings and corporate messaging, but could improve by publishing formal incident response procedures and enhancing HTTP security headers. No critical vulnerabilities or malware indicators were detected.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Publish a security.txt file or dedicated vulnerability disclosure page to facilitate responsible reporting and improve security transparency.
  3. Add explicit incident response contact information or abuse email addresses to demonstrate readiness and compliance with best practices.
  4. Verify and update WHOIS registration details to improve domain transparency and trustworthiness.
  5. Continue to maintain and enhance privacy compliance mechanisms, ensuring ongoing alignment with evolving regulations.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Jotron
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Jotron
Description
We specialize in developing, manufacturing, and marketing world-leading communication products and systems for land, sea, and air applications globally. Our commitment is your safe journey.
Key services
Maritime communication, Maritime navigation, Radio, Recorder, ATC solutions, Coastal solutions, Energy sector communication solutions
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, JavaScript, Lottie animations, Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot
Frameworks
React
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Google Tag Manager with consent
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Cookiebot
Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multimedia.
  2. Strong focus on safety communication products for maritime, air, and energy sectors.
  3. Good privacy and cookie compliance with explicit policies and consent mechanisms.
  4. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found on the main page; contact is via form.
  5. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure page.
  6. No explicit incident response or abuse contact information.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and frameworks.
  8. No signs of WAF or blocking mechanisms.
  9. WHOIS data is missing or privacy protected, which is unusual for a corporate domain.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including React for frontend rendering and Lottie for animations, indicating a contemporary and interactive user experience. The presence of Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot reflects mature analytics and privacy management practices. The CMS appears to be Episerver (inferred from react4xp service paths), supporting structured content management. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and accessibility features. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags and Open Graph data. The site uses HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration. There is room for improvement in security headers and incident response readiness. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional and scalable digital presence suitable for a medium-sized enterprise in the technology and energy sectors.
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 jotron.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 jotron.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.