Skip to main content

Security report for lcto.lu

Luxembourg City Tourist Office · Hospitality · Luxembourg

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Luxembourg City Tourist Office operates a professional and content-rich website aimed at promoting tourism in Luxembourg City. The site offers extensive information on guided tours, events, accommodations, and local attractions, targeting tourists and visitors. The website demonstrates a mature digital presence with multilingual support and structured navigation, enhancing user experience and accessibility. Technically, the site employs modern tracking and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, and Facebook Pixel, alongside a cookie consent mechanism, indicating awareness of privacy compliance requirements. However, the absence of explicit privacy and terms of service pages, as well as missing WHOIS registration data, introduces trust and compliance concerns. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS enforced, but lacks explicit security headers and vulnerability disclosure information. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy from a content and design perspective but would benefit from improved transparency and security documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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';…

  3. 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

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching lcto.lu

This scan found 29 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
47
Security headers
15
Email security
40
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
54

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 Luxembourg City Tourist Office holds a key position as the official tourism promoter for Luxembourg City, focusing on providing comprehensive visitor information and services. Their business model revolves around enhancing the visitor experience through guided tours, event promotion, and accommodation listings. The website's multilingual approach and detailed content suggest a strategy to attract a broad international audience. The use of multiple analytics and marketing tools indicates an active effort to understand visitor behavior and optimize engagement. However, the lack of visible contact information and corporate details online may limit direct customer interaction and trust-building. The absence of WHOIS data is unusual and may warrant further investigation to confirm domain legitimacy. No partnerships or subsidiaries were identified from the website content.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communications, and implements a cookie consent mechanism, reflecting basic privacy compliance. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the defense-in-depth posture. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure policy is present, limiting transparency for security researchers. No contact information for incident response or security concerns is provided. The use of third-party tracking scripts introduces potential privacy risks, though mitigated by consent management. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by adding security headers, publishing privacy and terms policies, and establishing clear incident response channels.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service pages accessible from the website footer.
  2. Implement and configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security-related inquiries.
  4. Establish and publish a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and incident reporting.
  5. Verify and update WHOIS registration data to ensure domain legitimacy and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Luxembourg City Tourist Office
Description
Visit the city of Luxembourg with Luxembourg City Tourist Office and experience a unique moment with over 40 guided tours and 80 locations to discover.
Key services
Guided tours, Visitor information, Event listings, Accommodation information, City maps and guides
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, FontAwesome 5 Pro, Typekit Fonts, Curator.io, CookieFirst Consent Management
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Consent management for cookies

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Curator.io, CookieFirst Consent Management
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and multilingual support.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and reduces trust.
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages found.
  4. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via CookieFirst.
  5. No direct contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content.
  6. Use of multiple tracking and analytics services detected.
  7. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found.
  8. No explicit security headers detected in the HTML content.
  9. Website is well structured with clear navigation and professional design.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Microsoft Clarity, Facebook Pixel, and CookieFirst for consent management. Fonts are loaded asynchronously from Typekit and Google Fonts, improving performance. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA labels. Performance appears moderate with lazy loading of images and asynchronous script loading. No CMS or hosting provider information is directly detectable. The site lacks explicit security headers and visible server-side security configurations. SEO is supported by proper meta tags, Open Graph, and Twitter card metadata. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and more transparent business information.
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 lcto.lu. 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 lcto.lu.

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.