Skip to main content

Security report for lkhb.at

Vorarlberger Krankenhaus-Betriebsgesellschaft.m.b.H. · Healthcare · Austria

Partial score · DNS & email only

40/100

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

Landeskrankenhaus Bregenz is a key healthcare institution in the Vorarlberg region of Austria, operating under the Vorarlberger Krankenhaus-Betriebsgesellschaft.m.b.H. umbrella. The hospital provides a wide range of medical services, including specialized departments, emergency care, and patient support, serving both local and regional populations. The website reflects a mature and professional healthcare provider with a strong emphasis on quality assurance, ethics, and patient engagement. Technically, the site uses modern JavaScript libraries and analytics tools, including CookieHub for consent management and both Google Analytics and Matomo for visitor tracking. However, the website suffers from a critical security shortfall due to an invalid or missing SSL certificate and lack of proper HTTPS enforcement, which undermines user trust and data security. The absence of DNSSEC and CAA records further indicates room for improvement in DNS security. Overall, while the content and business credibility are strong, the technical and security posture requires urgent attention to meet modern standards and regulatory compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
6of 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

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

Keep watching lkhb.at

This scan found 11 issues across 5 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
0
Email security
50
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
40

Not counted

  • Security headers: 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 hospital holds a strong market position as a regional healthcare leader with a long history dating back to 1837. It operates multiple subsidiary hospitals and offers comprehensive medical and administrative services. The business model is public healthcare provision, focusing on patient care, training, and community health initiatives. The website's detailed content, certifications, and contact information support a transparent and trustworthy image. Partnerships with religious and social organizations are evident, enhancing community integration. The use of multiple analytics and consent tools indicates a data-driven approach to user engagement and compliance. However, the technical infrastructure shows signs of legacy or incomplete setup, particularly in DNS and SSL configurations, which could impact operational reliability and security.

Security posture

The current security posture is moderate to weak. While the server uses nginx and includes some security headers like HSTS, the lack of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols represent critical vulnerabilities. This exposes users to potential data interception and undermines trust. The absence of DNSSEC and CAA records further reduces DNS security. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are found. The site uses secure cookie consent mechanisms and anonymizes IPs in Google Analytics, indicating some privacy awareness. Immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of DNS security are recommended to elevate the security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable full HTTPS support.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable legacy insecure protocols.
  3. Implement DNSSEC and CAA records to strengthen DNS security and certificate issuance control.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability assessments to identify and mitigate risks.
  6. Enhance security headers with Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options to prevent common web attacks.
  7. Maintain and update cookie consent and privacy policies to ensure ongoing GDPR compliance.
  8. Improve website performance by optimizing resource loading and reducing cache age where appropriate.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Vorarlberger Krankenhaus-Betriebsgesellschaft.m.b.H.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is served by nginx and uses JavaScript libraries including Modernizr and CookieHub for feature detection and cookie consent management. Analytics are implemented via Google Analytics and Matomo, with IP anonymization enabled. The site is well-structured with comprehensive metadata, Open Graph tags, and consistent branding. However, DNS records for the domain are missing, which may indicate use of a proxy or CDN, or incomplete DNS setup. The SSL configuration is invalid with no TLS protocols enabled, severely impacting security and performance. The site has good mobile optimization and accessibility features, with clear navigation and rich content. Performance metrics are not available but the high cache age and chunked transfer encoding suggest potential latency issues. Overall, the technical stack is modern but requires critical security and DNS improvements.
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 lkhb.at. 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 lkhb.at.

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.