Skip to main content

Security report for kanzlei-siebert.de

Siebert Lexow Rechtsanwaltskanzlei · Other · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Siebert Lexow Rechtsanwaltskanzlei is a specialized German law firm focusing on Internet law, data protection, and related legal services. The website presents a professional and comprehensive portfolio of legal packages and individual consulting services tailored for businesses, online shops, agencies, and founders. The firm leverages over 15 years of experience, positioning itself as a trusted legal partner in the digital business domain. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern tools like WPBakery and Bootstrap, and employs Matomo analytics for privacy-conscious user tracking. Security posture is good with HTTPS enabled, but lacks explicit security headers and detailed privacy or incident response policies. Overall, the site is well-designed, user-friendly, and SEO-optimized, reflecting a high level of professionalism and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
55/ 100 · Medium
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.

    • 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

  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 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 kanzlei-siebert.de

This scan found 23 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
100
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
55
Average
53

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 kanzlei-siebert.de, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for kanzlei-siebert.de right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

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

Business context

Business profile

The firm targets a niche market of Internet law and data protection, offering fixed and customizable legal packages such as website and online shop audits, DSGVO audits, and contracts for agencies and app developers. Its business model is service-oriented, focusing on legal consulting and compliance solutions for digital businesses. The website's clear structure, detailed service descriptions, and use of structured data indicate a mature digital presence. The absence of explicit privacy and cookie policies suggests room for compliance improvement. The firm appears to operate independently without visible parent or subsidiary companies. Its use of DomainControl nameservers aligns with common hosting practices but lacks detailed WHOIS registrant data, which slightly reduces transparency.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, uses privacy-respecting Matomo analytics, and avoids exposing sensitive data in the HTML. However, it lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options, which are recommended best practices. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which could impact trust in security incident handling. The absence of cookie consent mechanisms and privacy policies may pose GDPR compliance risks. Overall, the security posture is moderate but can be significantly improved by implementing standard security headers, explicit privacy and cookie policies, and incident response contact details.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish an incident response policy and provide dedicated security contact channels (e.g., security@ or abuse@ email addresses).
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to foster responsible security reporting.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and provide more detailed contact information including physical address and email contacts.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Siebert Lexow Rechtsanwaltskanzlei
Description
Rechtsanwälte für Internetrecht - Kompetente Rechtsberatung für Unternehmen, Shops & Agenturen ✓ praxisnah ✓ bundesweit
Key services
Webseiten-Prüfung, Online-Shop-Prüfung, DSGVO-Audit, Marken-Paket, Rechtstexte-Check, Agentur- & Webdesigner-Paket, App-Paket, Coaching-Paket, Individuelle Rechtsberatung
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.3, WPBakery Page Builder, Bootstrap CSS, Matomo Analytics, jQuery 3.7.1
Frameworks
Yoast SEO
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Matomo for privacy-respecting analytics

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Professional legal services website focused on Internet law and data protection
  2. Clear service packages and individual consulting offerings
  3. Good use of structured data and SEO best practices
  4. No explicit privacy or cookie policies found on main page
  5. No visible security policy or incident response info
  6. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt found
  7. Contact info includes phone and contact form but no email addresses visible
  8. Use of Matomo analytics indicates privacy-conscious tracking
  9. No WAF or blocking detected
  10. Website content is fully accessible and comprehensive
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using WPBakery Page Builder and Bootstrap for responsive design. It employs Matomo analytics for user tracking, indicating a focus on privacy. The site loads fonts and assets efficiently with preload hints and uses structured data (JSON-LD) for SEO and business information. Hosting is via DomainControl nameservers, likely GoDaddy. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization and clear navigation. However, the lack of security headers and explicit privacy/cookie policies indicates technical debt in security and compliance areas. The site is well-maintained with recent content modification dates and uses Yoast SEO plugin for optimization.
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 kanzlei-siebert.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 kanzlei-siebert.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.