Skip to main content

Security report for lee-evans.co.uk

Lee Evans Partnership LLP · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Lee Evans Partnership LLP is a UK-based award-winning architecture, planning, heritage, and interior design practice with offices in Canterbury and London. The company targets clients seeking professional architectural and planning services. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear service offerings and a focus on quality design. The business appears to be a small-sized firm founded around 2016, with a solid market position in the real estate and design sector. Technically, the website is built on WordPress CMS using modern technologies such as jQuery, Bootstrap, Google Analytics, and Google Maps API. The site is mobile-optimized with good SEO practices and moderate performance. Security posture is good with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though security headers and cookie consent mechanisms are lacking. The security posture is solid but could be improved by adding security headers, publishing security policies, and implementing GDPR-compliant cookie consent. The absence of WHOIS data due to an invalid query limits domain trust verification but the professional website and social media presence support legitimacy. Overall, the site is safe, professional, and trustworthy with room for privacy and security enhancements. Strategic recommendations include improving privacy compliance with cookie consent, adding security headers, publishing incident response contacts, and regular security audits to maintain trust and compliance.

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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  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 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

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

Keep watching lee-evans.co.uk

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. 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
27
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
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

Lee Evans Partnership LLP operates in the architecture and real estate sector, providing specialized services in architecture, planning, heritage, and interiors. Their market positioning as an award-winning practice with offices in two UK cities indicates a competitive advantage in quality and reputation. The business model is service-oriented, targeting clients needing professional design and planning expertise. Revenue streams likely derive from project-based contracts and consultancy. The company maintains an active partnership ecosystem visible through social media and a professional website. Growth indicators include recent content updates and active social channels. Strategic observations suggest a focus on quality and client engagement, with potential to expand digital presence and compliance maturity.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and no exposed sensitive data. However, the lack of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and absence of a published security policy or incident response contacts indicate gaps in security governance. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files were found, limiting transparency. GDPR compliance is partially addressed via a privacy policy but lacks cookie consent mechanisms. The site uses third-party scripts like Google Analytics, which require careful management to avoid privacy risks. Overall, the security posture is adequate for a small professional services firm but should be enhanced to meet higher compliance and security standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to improve defense against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Conduct regular security audits of third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance WHOIS data accuracy and domain registration monitoring to strengthen domain trust and legitimacy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Lee Evans Partnership LLP
Description
L E P (Lee Evans Partnership LLP) is an award-winning architecture, planning, heritage, and interior design practice based in Canterbury and London, UK.
Key services
Architecture, Planning, Heritage, Interiors
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Bootstrap, Google Analytics, Google Maps API, Font Awesome, Yoast SEO
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure Google Analytics snippet

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Professional architecture firm website with clear service offerings.
  3. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers found on homepage; contact form present.
  4. Social media links to Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter are present and active.
  5. Privacy policy page exists but no explicit cookie policy or consent mechanism detected.
  6. No visible security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information.
  7. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices evident.
  8. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  9. WHOIS data query was performed incorrectly on subdomain causing failure.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS leveraging a modern tech stack including jQuery, Bootstrap, Font Awesome, and Google APIs. The site uses Yoast SEO plugin for search optimization and Google Tag Manager for analytics management. Performance is moderate with good mobile responsiveness and basic accessibility features. The site lacks advanced security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which are technical debt areas. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. The technical infrastructure supports a professional user experience but could benefit from modernization in security and privacy controls to reduce risks and improve compliance.
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 lee-evans.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 lee-evans.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.