Skip to main content

Security report for linakergreen.com

Linaker Green Limited · Transportation · United Kingdom

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

45/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Linaker Green Limited is a small UK-based insurance brokerage firm specializing in commercial insurance for transportation and high-risk trades such as scaffolders and roofers. The company has a long history dating back to 1987 and is authorized by the Financial Conduct Authority, which adds credibility to its operations. The website provides basic information about the company, its history, and services but lacks modern design and mobile optimization. Technically, the website is built using basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript without modern frameworks or CMS. There is no evidence of HTTPS or advanced security headers, which exposes the site to potential security risks. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other privacy regulations. No contact emails or phone numbers are explicitly provided, limiting direct communication channels. From a security perspective, the site lacks essential protections such as SSL/TLS encryption and security headers. The WHOIS data for the domain is missing or unavailable, which is a significant concern as it raises questions about the domain's legitimacy and registration status. While the website content appears professional and safe, these technical and registration issues reduce overall trustworthiness. Overall, the website presents a basic but functional online presence for Linaker Green Limited. However, critical improvements in security, privacy compliance, and domain registration transparency are necessary to enhance trust and protect both the business and its customers.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

8 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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"

  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

    • 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 linakergreen.com

This scan found 27 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
30
Email security
70
DNS health
70
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
50
Average
45

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 · found on this site
  • 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

Linaker Green Limited operates in a niche market segment focusing on insurance brokerage for commercial transportation and high-risk trades. Its competitive advantage lies in specialized knowledge and a personal service approach. The business model is service-oriented, relying on brokerage commissions. The company targets commercial clients in the UK, particularly in the Halesowen area. The website indicates a stable but small-sized operation with no evident subsidiaries or parent company currently active. The FCA authorization is a key trust and regulatory compliance indicator. The lack of modern digital marketing tools and analytics suggests limited digital maturity and growth focus. Partnerships or related domains are not evident from the data provided.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is weak. The absence of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability that exposes users to data interception risks. No security headers are implemented, and there is no evidence of secure forms or input validation. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. The missing WHOIS data further undermines trust and raises concerns about domain legitimacy. Incident response and security policy information are not available, suggesting limited security governance. Overall, the site is vulnerable to common web threats and lacks essential security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all website traffic.
  2. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure GDPR compliance.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Provide clear and verified contact information including emails and phone numbers for customer support.
  5. Investigate and resolve the missing WHOIS registration data to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Linaker Green Limited
Description
Linaker Green Limited is an insurance brokerage firm specializing in commercial insurance for road haulage, coach and motor trades, scaffolders, and roofers. Established in 1987, it operates from Halesowen, UK, and is FCA authorized.
Key services
Commercial insurance brokerage, Insurance for road haulage, Coach and motor trade insurance, Insurance for scaffolders and roofers
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, HTML, CSS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and no WAF blocking.
  2. No HTTPS detected in provided data; security posture is weak.
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, only terms and conditions.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly provided in content.
  5. Website uses basic legacy HTML and JavaScript with no modern frameworks.
  6. FCA authorization is prominently mentioned, adding trust.
  7. WHOIS data missing, which is unusual and suspicious.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses legacy HTML and JavaScript with no modern frameworks or CMS detected. The site lacks mobile optimization and accessibility features, which limits usability on modern devices. Performance is moderate but could be improved with modern web standards. No analytics or tracking scripts were found, indicating minimal data collection. The hosting provider and infrastructure details are not available. The technical debt is moderate due to outdated design and lack of security features. Modernization opportunities include adopting responsive design, CMS integration, and enhanced security configurations.
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 linakergreen.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 linakergreen.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.