Skip to main content

Security report for londonenv.com

London Environmental Pest Control Limited · Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Network security, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

44/100

Risk levelHigh

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

London Environmental Pest Control Limited operates a professional website offering environmental health and safety services primarily in London. Their key offerings include pest control, cleaning, washroom services, steel work, and rope access, targeting both commercial and residential clients. The company demonstrates trustworthiness through certifications such as NPTA Accreditation, Constructionline, and SafeContractor. The website is built on WordPress with common plugins and shows good design and usability, though it lacks explicit privacy and cookie policies. Technically, the site uses modern frameworks and libraries but lacks visible security headers and detailed security policies. The absence of WHOIS registration data is a notable concern, potentially indicating privacy protection or registration issues, which impacts trust. Overall, the site is functional and professional but requires improvements in privacy compliance and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

9 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.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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. 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

  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

    • 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

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

Keep watching londonenv.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
15
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
44

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

The company positions itself as a local environmental services provider with a focus on health and safety. Their business model revolves around service delivery in pest control and hygiene maintenance. The presence of certifications and a clear contact mechanism supports credibility. The lack of social media presence and limited marketing tools suggests a modest digital marketing approach. The company likely targets small to medium-sized businesses and residential customers in London. The website content and structure indicate a stable but small-sized operation with room for growth in digital presence and compliance.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and includes spam protection on its contact form, indicating basic security awareness. However, the absence of security headers, privacy and cookie policies, and incident response information reveals gaps in security maturity. The missing WHOIS data further complicates trust evaluation. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. To improve security posture, the company should implement standard HTTP security headers, publish privacy and cookie policies, and establish clear incident response contacts. Regular updates and vulnerability assessments are recommended to maintain security.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to ensure GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Verify and publish domain WHOIS information or ensure legitimate privacy protection is in place.
  4. Establish and publish an incident response policy with clear contact channels.
  5. Enhance website analytics and marketing tools to improve business intelligence and user engagement.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
London Environmental Pest Control Limited
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
London Environmental Pest Control Limited
Description
London Environmental Pest Control Limited provides health and safety services focused on creating cleaner and safer environments throughout London. Key services include pest control, cleaning services, washroom services, steel work, and rope access. The company targets commercial and residential clients seeking professional hygiene and environmental safety solutions.
Key services
Pest Control, Cleaning Services, Washroom Services, Steel Work, Rope Access
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 5.0.22, jQuery 1.12.4, Bootstrap 3/4 (based on bootstrap.min.js), Font Awesome 4.7.0, Elementor plugin, Contact Form 7 plugin, Photo Gallery plugin
Frameworks
WordPress, Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS (implied by URLs)
  • Contact form with spam protection (pirate-forms custom spam script)

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF
  2. No privacy or cookie policy found
  3. Contact information is clearly provided with email, phone, address, and contact form
  4. Website uses WordPress CMS with common plugins
  5. Certifications displayed enhance trust
  6. WHOIS data is missing, which is unusual and reduces trust
  7. No social media links found
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected
  9. No security headers detected in provided data
  10. No explicit security or incident response policies found
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 5.0.22 with plugins including Contact Form 7, Elementor, and a photo gallery plugin. It uses jQuery 1.12.4 and Bootstrap for responsive design, along with Font Awesome for icons. The site loads external resources from Google Fonts and WordPress.org. Performance is moderate with good mobile optimization. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimization is minimal with no meta description or Open Graph tags detected. The site lacks advanced security headers and analytics integrations. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a small business but could benefit from modernization 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 londonenv.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 londonenv.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.