Skip to main content

Security report for lundberg-co.com

Lundberg & Co · Media · Sweden

Critical risk. 20 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Email security and 3 other checks.

Security score

21/100

Risk levelCritical

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

Lundberg & Co is a Swedish full-service communications agency established in 1993, specializing in creating relevant and long-term marketing concepts that connect brands emotionally with consumers. The company positions itself as an award-winning agency with a strong focus on consumer relevance and brand connection. Their website is built on WordPress using Elementor, featuring modern web technologies and a professional design optimized for mobile devices. While the site is well-structured and visually appealing, it lacks explicit privacy, cookie, and security policies, which are critical for compliance and trust. The security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled but missing important security headers and incident response information. Analytics tracking is minimal due to an unconfigured Google Analytics plugin. Contact information is clearly presented, enhancing business credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 100 · Critical
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

20 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

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  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.

    • 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

  4. 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: Telnet

      Port 23 (Telnet) is publicly accessible - Telnet - Unencrypted remote access

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to Telnet 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
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: SMB

      Port 445 (SMB) is publicly accessible - SMB - Windows file sharing, high risk

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to SMB 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

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

Keep watching lundberg-co.com

This scan found 34 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
0
Security headers
15
Email security
40
DNS health
60
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
10
Average
21

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

The company operates in the media and communications sector, targeting brands and businesses seeking comprehensive marketing and branding services. Its long history and award-winning status provide competitive advantages. The business model revolves around full-service communications, including strategy, branding, and campaign development. The website showcases client logos and case studies, indicating a strong partnership ecosystem. Growth indicators include a modern digital presence and active social media channels. However, the lack of privacy and security disclosures may impact trust with privacy-conscious clients.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communication, but lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security, which could mitigate common web attacks. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies are published, limiting transparency and readiness for security incidents. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates compliance gaps with GDPR and other regulations. No forms collecting sensitive data were detected on the homepage, reducing immediate risk exposure. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but requires improvements to meet best practices and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance and consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection.
  3. Publish an incident response policy and provide dedicated security contact channels such as security@ or abuse@ emails.
  4. Configure and properly manage analytics tools to ensure privacy compliance and data minimization.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct regular security audits to identify and remediate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Lundberg & Co
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Lundberg & Co
Description
Lundberg & Co is an award-winning full-service communications agency founded in 1993. They create relevant and long-term concepts and solutions for clients, focusing on consumer relevance and emotional connection between brands and consumers.
Key services
Communications strategy, Branding, Marketing campaigns, Concept development
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, jQuery, Font Awesome, Google Fonts
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

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
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. Contact information is clearly provided including emails, phone numbers, and physical address.
  4. No security or incident response policies are published.
  5. Google Analytics plugin is installed but not configured, indicating limited analytics tracking.
  6. Site uses modern WordPress and Elementor technologies with good design and mobile optimization.
  7. No security headers detected in the HTML content.
  8. No forms detected that collect user data directly on the homepage.
  9. Social media presence is strong with Facebook, Instagram, Vimeo, and LinkedIn links.
  10. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file found.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using the Elementor page builder, leveraging jQuery and Font Awesome for UI elements. The site loads moderately fast and is mobile optimized with responsive design. However, no advanced performance optimizations such as caching or CDN usage were explicitly detected. The HTML is valid and well-structured, but the absence of security headers and incomplete analytics configuration indicate technical debt. Opportunities exist to modernize security configurations, improve SEO metadata, and enhance accessibility compliance to reduce technical risks and improve user experience.
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 lundberg-co.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 lundberg-co.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.