Skip to main content

Security report for kandmracing.co.uk

K & M Racing · Other · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

K & M Racing is a small, UK-based racehorse training partnership established in 2023 by David Killahena and Graeme McPherson. The company offers racehorse training, syndicate services, and horses for sale, positioning itself as a forward-thinking and innovative operation within the equine sports sector. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image, targeting racehorse owners and racing enthusiasts. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with popular plugins for SEO, GDPR compliance, and social media integration, demonstrating a moderate level of digital maturity. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced and cookie consent implemented, though the absence of security headers and incident response information suggests room for improvement. Overall, the website is trustworthy and well-maintained, supporting the company's business goals effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

6 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.

    • 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. 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

  3. 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 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';…

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

Keep watching kandmracing.co.uk

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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
80
Average
55

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 business operates in the niche equine sports sector, focusing on racehorse training and syndicates. Its market position is emerging but promising, leveraging modern training facilities and a skilled team. The business model includes direct training services and syndicate memberships, appealing to a specialized audience. The website's integration with social media and Racing Post links indicates active engagement with the racing community. Growth indicators include recent establishment and professional digital presence. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified, suggesting an independent operation. The company maintains clear contact channels and transparent business information, enhancing credibility.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a baseline security maturity with HTTPS and GDPR-compliant cookie consent. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No visible incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are present, which could hinder rapid response to security events. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected. The security score is moderate, reflecting good practices but highlighting areas for enhancement to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement essential security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection) to strengthen browser security.
  2. Create and publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Regularly update and audit WordPress plugins and themes to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to improve compliance and user experience for all visitors.
  5. Consider adding terms of service and vulnerability disclosure pages to bolster legal and security posture.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
K & M Racing
Description
K&M Racing is the training partnership of David Killahena and Graeme McPherson, based in Stow-On-The-Wold, Gloucestershire. Established shortly after the start of the 2023/24 season, we offer one of the most exciting and forward thinking training operations in the country.
Key services
Racehorse training, Racing syndicates, Horses for sale
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO, WPBakery Page Builder, jQuery, Google Analytics, Complianz GDPR plugin, Instagram Feed plugin
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Clear contact information and social media presence enhance trust.
  3. Cookie consent and privacy policy indicate GDPR awareness.
  4. No visible security headers detected; opportunity for improvement.
  5. No terms of service or security policy pages found.
  6. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information available.
  7. Use of popular WordPress plugins and Google Analytics for SEO and tracking.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using well-known plugins such as Yoast SEO and WPBakery Page Builder, indicating a standard but effective technical infrastructure. Google Analytics is used for traffic analysis, and the site includes GDPR-compliant cookie management. Performance is moderate, with responsive design and mobile optimization evident. The site uses external resources like Google Fonts and Instagram feeds, which are common but should be monitored for performance impact. No critical technical debt or outdated technologies were detected, but security enhancements and accessibility improvements are recommended to future-proof the platform.
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 kandmracing.co.uk. 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 kandmracing.co.uk.

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.