Skip to main content

Security report for lfc.com

Lfc · Real estate · United states

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

66/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
5of 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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. 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

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

Keep watching lfc.com

This scan found 15 issues across 4 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
77
Security headers
20
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
66

Not counted

  • Email security: did not complete in this scan.
  • DNS health: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 niche player in the luxury residential real estate auction market with a global reach. Its business model revolves around facilitating transparent and open auctions online, serving multiple stakeholders including buyers, sellers, and agents. The platform's longevity and domain age support its credibility. Revenue streams likely include auction fees, seller services, and possibly advertising or premium account features. The presence of social login options and personalized user experiences indicates a focus on customer engagement and retention. The website's content and structure reflect a professional approach, targeting a medium-sized business scale primarily in the United States. No parent or subsidiary companies were identified, suggesting an independent operation. The company could benefit from expanding its trust signals by publishing certifications or testimonials.

Security posture

The website maintains a good security baseline with HTTPS and a Content-Security-Policy header to upgrade insecure requests. The domain status clientTransferProhibited adds protection against unauthorized domain transfers. However, the lack of DNSSEC implementation is a missed opportunity to secure DNS queries. No explicit security policies or incident response contacts are published, which could hinder transparency and readiness in case of security incidents. The forms for login and registration appear secure with password confirmation and social login options, but no advanced anti-bot or multi-factor authentication mechanisms were detected. The absence of a cookie consent banner may expose the company to GDPR compliance risks. Overall, the security posture is solid but could be enhanced by adopting additional headers, publishing security policies, and implementing privacy consent mechanisms.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Implement additional HTTP security headers such as X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, Referrer-Policy, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  4. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.
  5. Consider adopting a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
LFC Auctions
Description
Discover a better way to buy & sell luxury residential real estate in an open & transparent marketplace.
Key services
Online real estate auctions, Property listings, Seller services for auctioning properties, Buyer information and bidding platform, Agent information and support
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Materialize CSS/JS, Google Fonts, Google Tag Manager (gtag.js), Select2, Slick Carousel
Frameworks
Materialize
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Content-Security-Policy header present
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status to prevent unauthorized transfers
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure login and registration forms with password confirmation

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via gtag.js)
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 a professional online auction platform for luxury residential real estate.
  2. Clear business focus with dedicated sections for buyers, sellers, and agents.
  3. Secure HTTPS connection with basic security headers.
  4. No cookie consent mechanism detected, which may impact GDPR compliance.
  5. No explicit security or incident response policies published.
  6. Social login options enhance user convenience.
  7. WHOIS data supports legitimacy and long-term operation.
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 lfc.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 lfc.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.

lfc.com security report: 66/100, medium risk | Guard