Skip to main content

Security report for lhc.lu

Luxembourg House of Cybersecurity · Technology · Luxembourg

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

Security score

70/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Luxembourg House of Cybersecurity (LHC) serves as the central hub for cybersecurity resilience in Luxembourg, hosting key national centers such as CIRCL and NC3. The organization focuses on fostering innovation, collaboration, and capacity building in cybersecurity through various services including acceleration programs, community meet-ups, and standards development. The website reflects a professional and government-aligned entity with a clear mission to enhance Luxembourg's cybersecurity posture. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including React, Bootstrap, and Leaflet, with privacy-conscious analytics via Matomo. The site is hosted on Luxembourg-based infrastructure (Restena) and demonstrates good mobile optimization and user experience. However, some technical improvements are recommended, such as implementing security headers and cookie consent mechanisms. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS and avoids exposing sensitive data, but lacks explicit security headers and a published security policy. Incident response is facilitated through links to CIRCL's reporting portal. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy available but no cookie consent banner. Overall, the site presents a strong security posture appropriate for a government-related cybersecurity entity. The overall risk is low, with recommendations focusing on enhancing privacy compliance, security headers, and accessibility to further strengthen trust and regulatory adherence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
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

5 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

    • 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

  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

  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 lhc.lu

This scan found 23 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
72
Security headers
65
Email security
75
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
70

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

LHC occupies a pivotal position in Luxembourg's cybersecurity ecosystem, acting as a public-private partnership that integrates government agencies, private sector partners, and innovation accelerators. Its business model revolves around service provision, capacity building, and fostering cybersecurity innovation. The presence of multiple shareholder government entities and partnerships with organizations like Technoport and ROOM#42 indicate a broad collaborative network. The target audience includes cybersecurity professionals, government bodies, and businesses requiring cyber resilience support. The organization's growth is supported by hosting national centers and offering specialized services, positioning it as a key player in Luxembourg's cybersecurity landscape.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with mandatory HTTPS and privacy-respecting analytics. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options represents a gap that could expose the site to certain web-based attacks. The lack of a published security policy and data protection officer contact reduces transparency. Incident response capabilities are well integrated via CIRCL. GDPR compliance is partial, with privacy policies present but no cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the security culture appears strong but could benefit from formalized policies and enhanced technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  2. Deploy a cookie consent banner to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy page detailing security practices, incident response procedures, and contact points.
  4. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve security communication.
  5. Enhance accessibility features to meet WCAG standards, improving usability and compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Luxembourg House of Cybersecurity
Description
Luxembourg House of Cybersecurity is the backbone of leading-edge cyber resilience in Luxembourg and aims at capitalising on and further developing innovation, competencies, collaboration and capacity building. It supports cybersecurity-related activities and hosts CIRCL and NC3 centers.
Key services
LUxembourg CYbersecurity Accelerator - LUCYA, Luxchat, Cyber Desk, Community Meet-up, ROOM#42, Testing Lab, ILNAS @LHC - Cybersecurity Standards
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Bootstrap, FontAwesome, Leaflet, Matomo Analytics
Frameworks
React
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of Matomo for privacy-respecting analytics

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible and functional with rich content.
  2. No WAF or blocking detected.
  3. No cookie consent mechanism found despite use of tracking.
  4. Privacy policy and terms of service are available as a PDF document.
  5. Contact information is clearly presented in the footer.
  6. No forms detected in the HTML content.
  7. Use of Matomo analytics indicates privacy-conscious tracking.
  8. No explicit security headers detected in the provided data.
  9. Strong branding and consistent navigation structure.
  10. Multiple external links to official government and cybersecurity partner sites.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React framework with Bootstrap for responsive design and Leaflet for mapping features. It uses Matomo analytics, favoring privacy over mainstream trackers. Hosting is managed via Restena, a Luxembourg-based provider, aligning with the site's government affiliation. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. The site lacks some SEO and accessibility optimizations but maintains a clean and professional structure. Technical debt appears low, though improvements in security headers and privacy mechanisms are advisable to reduce risk 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 lhc.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 lhc.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.