Krentz & Griffin Group · Finance · Isle of Man
High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.
Krentz & Griffin Group operates as a privately owned family office specializing in wealth management, asset management, financial advisory, and related offshore financial services. The website serves primarily as a landing page with minimal content and redirects users to a subpage after 5 seconds. The business targets high net worth individuals and families seeking comprehensive financial and trust services, positioning itself as a niche player in the finance sector with a focus on offshore jurisdictions such as the Isle of Man and Luxembourg. Technically, the website uses an older technology stack including jQuery 1.x, Font Awesome 4.x, and Leaflet 1.x, hosted on a CMS platform named mmpCMS. The site lacks modern performance and accessibility features, and there is no evidence of HTTPS or security headers, which indicates a low level of digital maturity and security posture. The site also lacks privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies, as well as contact information, which limits its compliance with privacy regulations such as GDPR. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS and security headers, combined with the use of outdated JavaScript libraries, exposes the site to potential vulnerabilities. No forms or data collection mechanisms were found, reducing the attack surface but also limiting user engagement. The lack of incident response contacts and security policies further indicates a low security maturity level. Overall, the website scores low on content quality, technical implementation, security posture, and privacy compliance, with moderate business credibility based on the business description. Strategic recommendations include implementing HTTPS, adding privacy and cookie policies with consent mechanisms, updating technology stack components, and providing clear contact and security incident response information to improve trust and compliance.
Scanned
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
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.
7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.
These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.
GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data
What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS
GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy
What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies
What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception
What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS
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.
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
This scan found 21 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.
€25per month
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.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
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
Not counted
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.
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
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention krentzgriffin.com, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for krentzgriffin.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
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
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with krentzgriffin.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review krentzgriffin.com.