Skip to main content

Security report for lakeside-labs.com

Lakeside Labs GmbH · Technology · Austria

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

38/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Lakeside Labs GmbH operates as a research and innovation hub specializing in self-organizing networked systems. The organization targets researchers, technology innovators, and academic-industry partners, offering research projects, publications, and collaborative partnerships. The website reflects a medium-sized technology entity based in Austria with a professional online presence and consistent branding. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with common plugins and libraries, but suffers from slow performance and basic mobile optimization. Security posture is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and missing DNS records, which undermines trust and exposes the site to potential risks. Privacy compliance is minimal, lacking cookie consent and comprehensive GDPR indicators. Overall, the site is functional but requires significant improvements in security and compliance to enhance trustworthiness and protect user data.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

8 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      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

  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 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 lakeside-labs.com

This scan found 17 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
0
Security headers
30
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
38

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 company positions itself as a specialized research institute with a focus on networked systems and innovation. Its business model revolves around collaborative research projects, funding acquisition, and dissemination of scientific publications. The presence of partner logos and awards indicates a credible ecosystem and recognition in its field. The target audience includes academic and industry stakeholders interested in advanced networking technologies. The website content is professionally curated, supporting the company's market position. However, the lack of detailed business registration data and incomplete DNS configuration may raise operational concerns. The company maintains active social media channels to engage with its community and disseminate information.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low, primarily due to the lack of HTTPS enabled by a valid SSL certificate, which is a critical vulnerability. The presence of the HSTS header without proper SSL configuration is inconsistent and ineffective. DNS misconfigurations, including missing A, NS, MX, and TXT records, further degrade security and availability. No incident response or security policies are publicly disclosed, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present. The absence of cookie consent mechanisms and GDPR compliance indicators suggests potential regulatory non-compliance. These issues collectively expose the organization to risks such as data interception, phishing, and reputational damage.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and properly configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and align with HSTS policies.
  2. Correct DNS configurations by adding necessary A, NS, MX, and TXT records and enable DNSSEC and CAA for enhanced security.
  3. Implement a cookie consent mechanism and update privacy policies to reflect GDPR compliance.
  4. Publish security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure information to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Optimize website performance and mobile responsiveness to improve user experience and accessibility.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Lakeside Labs GmbH
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with standard plugins such as Papercite and Instagram Feed, and uses jQuery and Leaflet for interactive features. While the design is professional and content is relevant, technical shortcomings include missing DNS records and invalid SSL configuration, which impact site availability and security. Performance metrics indicate slow loading with zero resource count reported, suggesting possible measurement issues or caching effects. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, with room for improvement. SEO is basic with standard meta tags but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Overall, the technical infrastructure requires modernization and security hardening to support business operations effectively.
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 lakeside-labs.com. 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 lakeside-labs.com.

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.