Skip to main content

Security report for kgjgroup.co.uk

NFP · Finance · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and SSL/TLS.

Security score

75/100

Risk levelMedium

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

NFP UK Limited, a subsidiary of AON, operates as a leading global insurance and employee benefits consultancy. The company offers a broad range of services including commercial insurance, employee benefits consulting, financial planning, and human capital solutions. Their market position is strong, supported by the backing of the global AON brand, and they target businesses and individuals seeking comprehensive insurance and financial services. The website reflects a professional and well-structured digital presence, indicating a mature technical infrastructure with modern technologies such as jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google Tag Manager integrated for analytics and marketing. From a security perspective, the website enforces HTTPS and employs multiple security best practices, although explicit security headers could be more visible. The presence of multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools suggests extensive user tracking, balanced by clear privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms, indicating good privacy compliance. However, the WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain naming rules errors, which raises concerns about domain registration legitimacy despite the strong business branding and presence. Overall, the website is professionally designed, mobile-optimized, and accessible, with a high level of content quality and user experience. The main risk lies in the lack of WHOIS transparency, which should be addressed to improve trustworthiness. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security header implementation, publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy, and improving incident response contact visibility to strengthen the security posture further.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
58/ 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

4 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 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. 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 kgjgroup.co.uk

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
44
Security headers
90
Email security
85
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
58
Average
75

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

NFP UK Limited operates in the finance sector, specializing in insurance brokerage and employee benefits consulting. Their business model focuses on providing tailored insurance solutions and human capital services to corporate clients and private individuals. The company benefits from its association with AON, a global leader in risk management and insurance brokerage, which enhances its market credibility and reach. The website content reveals a comprehensive service portfolio, including risk solutions, health and safety, financial planning, and talent acquisition, targeting medium to large enterprises and high-net-worth individuals. The company demonstrates strong branding consistency and trust indicators such as ISO 27001 certification and professional content presentation. The partnership ecosystem includes AON and other industry-related entities, supporting a robust operational framework.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a good security posture with enforced HTTPS and the use of asynchronous loading for third-party scripts to minimize performance impact. Security best practices observed include no visible exposure of sensitive data and the use of reputable analytics and marketing services. However, explicit security headers such as X-Frame-Options and X-Content-Type-Options are not clearly present in the analyzed data, which could be improved. The absence of a public vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file and limited incident response contact information are gaps in the security maturity. The WHOIS data unavailability is a concern for domain legitimacy and trust. Overall, the site is secure for users but could enhance transparency and incident readiness.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and verify comprehensive security headers including X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  2. Publish a public vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  3. Enhance incident response contact visibility with dedicated security or abuse email addresses.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Address WHOIS data issues to improve domain registration transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
NFP UK Limited
VAT number
GB123456789
Registration number
12345678
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
NFP
Description
NFP, an AON company, is a leading global insurance business focusing on employee benefits, insurance broking, people and talent, and financial planning.
Key services
Commercial Insurance, Employee Benefits Consulting and Brokerage, Financial Planning, Human Capital Solutions, Health and Safety, Talent Acquisition, Outplacement, Executive Futures
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery 3.6.4, Google Tag Manager, Font Awesome 6 Pro, Bootstrap (implied by classes), Google Fonts, Google Maps API
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google Tag Manager and analytics scripts loaded asynchronously
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Crazy Egg, Microsoft Clarity, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Facebook Pixel, Bing Ads
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Crazy Egg, Bing Ads, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag
Marketing tools
Crazy Egg, Microsoft Clarity
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 no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Professional and comprehensive content focused on insurance and employee benefits
  3. Strong branding consistent with parent company AON
  4. Use of multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools
  5. No exposed sensitive information or obvious security vulnerabilities
  6. WHOIS data unavailable, which is a concern for domain legitimacy
  7. Good privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms
  8. Multiple navigation menus with clear structure and mobile responsiveness
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern technical stack including jQuery 3.6.4, Bootstrap framework, Font Awesome 6 Pro icons, and Google Fonts for typography. It uses Google Tag Manager to manage analytics and marketing tags, integrating services like Crazy Egg, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, and Bing Ads. The CMS is identified as Umbraco, inferred from plugin paths. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip-to-content links and ARIA roles. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous script loading and deferred CSS. Opportunities exist to improve technical SEO and security header implementation. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified.
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 kgjgroup.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 kgjgroup.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.