Skip to main content

Security report for kamp.de

KAMP Netzwerkdienste GmbH · Technology · Germany

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

KAMP Netzwerkdienste GmbH is a medium-sized German IT service provider specializing in colocation, cloud services, and data center operations. The company holds multiple ISO certifications including ISO 27001 and ISO 14001, positioning itself as a trusted and certified provider in the German market, particularly in the Ruhr region. Their offerings include server housing, private server rooms, cloud-based virtual data centers, and specialized health-care IT services, targeting businesses requiring secure and flexible IT infrastructure solutions. The company enjoys a strong market position, recognized by industry awards and analyst reports such as ISG Provider Lens. Technically, the website is built on TYPO3 CMS with Bootstrap framework, employing modern web technologies and a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security posture is solid with strong TLS 1.2 configuration and no known vulnerabilities, though improvements are recommended in email authentication (DMARC), DNS security (DNSSEC), and HTTPS hardening (HSTS). Overall, KAMP demonstrates a mature digital presence aligned with its business focus on secure and certified IT infrastructure services.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

5 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 Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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

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

Keep watching kamp.de

This scan found 20 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
92
Security headers
65
Email security
80
DNS health
75
Network security
85
GDPR outside view
18
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

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 kamp.de, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
108
Employees
0
Customers
108
Third parties
0
Weak passwords
6%

9 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for kamp.de.

Select it in the checkout above.

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

KAMP operates in the technology sector with a focus on data center colocation and cloud services, serving a broad range of industries including healthcare. Their business model centers on providing scalable and secure IT infrastructure solutions, leveraging certifications and awards to build trust. The company targets enterprises and mid-market customers seeking high availability and compliance. Revenue streams likely include colocation rentals, cloud service subscriptions, managed network services, and specialized healthcare IT solutions. Strategic partnerships with email and marketing service providers (Zendesk, Sendinblue, Zoho) support customer engagement and marketing efforts. The company’s strong regional presence and industry recognition indicate competitive advantages in service quality and compliance. Growth indicators include recent infrastructure investments and sustainability initiatives such as 100% green energy usage. The partnership ecosystem includes secure-mailgate.com for email security and other service providers enhancing their offerings.

Security posture

KAMP exhibits a mature security posture with adherence to multiple ISO standards and ECB-S certification, reflecting strong information security management and data protection practices. The website employs secure TLS 1.2 with a strong cipher suite and is free from major SSL vulnerabilities. However, the absence of DMARC and DNSSEC represents gaps in email and DNS security that could expose the company to phishing or DNS spoofing risks. The lack of HSTS and OCSP stapling reduces HTTPS security robustness. No public vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file was found, indicating limited transparency in vulnerability management. Incident response contact information is not publicly disclosed, which may hinder rapid communication in case of security incidents. The cookie consent mechanism is GDPR compliant, supporting privacy regulations. Overall, the security culture appears strong but could benefit from enhanced email/DNS protections and public vulnerability disclosure policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement DMARC policy with enforcement to protect against email spoofing and phishing.
  2. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to ensure DNS integrity and prevent cache poisoning attacks.
  3. Configure HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload to enforce HTTPS.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling on the web server to improve SSL certificate revocation checking performance and security.
  5. Publish a security.txt file and establish a clear vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and incident response readiness.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
KAMP Netzwerkdienste GmbH
Technical notes

Notes

The website is powered by TYPO3 CMS and uses Bootstrap for responsive design, ensuring good mobile optimization and user experience. Google Tag Manager and consentmanager.net are integrated for analytics and cookie consent management, reflecting compliance with privacy regulations. The SSL configuration supports only TLS 1.2 with a strong cipher suite but lacks TLS 1.3 support, which could improve performance and security. DNS records show valid SPF but no DMARC or DNSSEC, indicating partial email and DNS security. The site performance is moderate with a page load time of approximately 4 seconds and 60 resources loaded. Accessibility is basic, with some ARIA roles and skip links present. SEO is supported by meta tags and Open Graph data but lacks JSON-LD structured data. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but could be modernized with updated TLS protocols and enhanced DNS/email security measures.
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 kamp.de. 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 kamp.de.

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.