Skip to main content

Security report for kthe.at

KTHE | Team Farner · Media · Austria

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

KTHE | Team Farner is a medium-sized Austrian communications company offering a comprehensive range of communication services including brand design, campaigns, PR concepts, and platforms. They position themselves as a leading provider in the Austrian market with a strong emphasis on creativity and international outlook. The website is built on WordPress with a modern tech stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, and Yoast SEO, but suffers from slow performance and basic accessibility. Security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS, lack of security headers, and missing DNS security features. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy and cookie notice present but no advanced GDPR indicators. Business credibility is moderate with clear contact information and social media presence but lacks certifications or detailed policies. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires urgent security improvements.

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

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 kthe.at

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. 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
50
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
51

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 kthe.at, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for kthe.at 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

KTHE operates in the media sector focusing on communications and branding services. Their business model is service-oriented targeting Austrian businesses needing comprehensive communication solutions. They maintain a strong client portfolio as evidenced by displayed logos and have an active marketing presence via social media and newsletters. The company leverages WordPress CMS and common web technologies but lacks advanced security and compliance maturity. No evidence of parent or subsidiary companies was found. The company appears to be medium-sized with a focus on creativity and integrated communication offerings.

Security posture

The website's security posture is poor due to the lack of HTTPS and an invalid SSL certificate, exposing users to potential interception risks. No modern TLS protocols are enabled, and critical security headers such as HSTS and Content-Security-Policy are missing. DNS records lack DNSSEC and CAA, increasing risk of domain hijacking or misissued certificates. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, indicating low readiness for security incidents. Forms collect user emails but no explicit security measures or privacy notices are evident. Overall, the site is vulnerable and requires immediate remediation to protect user data and maintain trust.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or 1.3) and disable insecure protocols.
  3. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Add DMARC, DNSSEC, and CAA DNS records to enhance domain and email security.
  5. Publish clear security and incident response policies including contact channels for abuse or security issues.
  6. Enhance privacy compliance by improving cookie consent mechanisms and GDPR-related disclosures.
  7. Regularly audit and update third-party libraries and plugins to avoid vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on Apache servers managed by world4you.at with DNS configured on world4you.at nameservers. It uses WordPress 6.0.1 CMS with Yoast SEO plugin for SEO optimization. Frontend technologies include jQuery, Bootstrap, Slick Carousel, Parsley.js for form validation, and Animate.css for animations. Performance metrics indicate slow loading or missing data, suggesting potential optimization needs. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and basic accessibility features. However, the lack of HTTPS and modern security headers represents a significant technical risk. DNS configuration lacks advanced security features such as DNSSEC and CAA. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard but requires modernization and security hardening.
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 kthe.at. 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 kthe.at.

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.