Skip to main content

Security report for marvo.li

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 3 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.marvo.li is a German language site titled 'Marvo Home' that appears to represent a small business or personal brand. The site uses WordPress CMS with the Enfold theme and several plugins including Google Tag Manager and Google reCAPTCHA for analytics and bot protection. The content quality is basic with limited visible business information and no explicit privacy policy or terms of service pages detected. Cookie consent mechanisms are implemented, indicating some level of privacy compliance. The technical infrastructure is moderate with modern technologies but lacks visible security headers and detailed contact information. The security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled but could be improved by adding security headers and explicit security policies. Overall, the site is accessible without WAF or security challenges, but the lack of detailed business and security information limits trust and compliance confidence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

3 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

  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 marvo.li

This scan found 21 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
62
Security headers
65
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
73

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 business behind www.marvo.li is not clearly identified from the website content or WHOIS data, which is privacy protected. The site targets a German-speaking audience and likely operates as a small business or personal brand. The business model and market position are unclear due to limited content and absence of detailed descriptions or contact information. The use of WordPress and common plugins suggests a standard web presence without advanced e-commerce or enterprise features. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The site’s marketing ecosystem includes Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. Growth indicators and revenue streams cannot be assessed from the available data.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA, which are positive security measures. However, no security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or X-Content-Type-Options were detected, which are recommended best practices. There is no visible privacy policy, terms of service, or incident response information, which are important for compliance and user trust. No vulnerability disclosures or security.txt files were found. The absence of contact information for security or abuse reporting reduces incident response readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by implementing security headers, publishing privacy and security policies, and providing clear contact channels for security issues.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Add clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security-related inquiries.
  4. Create a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Enhance cookie consent mechanisms with detailed information on data collection and user rights.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google reCAPTCHA, Google Tag Manager, Fonts Google Fonts, WordPress, Enfold Theme, RevSlider Plugin, AWSM Team Pro Plugin
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms
  2. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented
  4. No visible contact emails or phone numbers found in the HTML content
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with Enfold theme and several plugins
  6. Google Tag Manager and reCAPTCHA are used for analytics and bot protection
  7. No security headers detected in the provided data
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information found
  9. Content is in German language (html lang=de)
  10. Website appears to be a small business or personal site with limited public business info
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress using the Enfold theme, a popular and well-supported CMS and theme combination. It uses Google Fonts for typography and integrates Google Tag Manager and Google reCAPTCHA for analytics and bot protection. The site loads external resources from trusted domains such as fonts.googleapis.com and gstatic.com. Performance is moderate with preconnect and preload hints for fonts and scripts. Mobile optimization appears good based on responsive meta tags and CSS classes. Accessibility features are basic but present. No advanced frameworks beyond WordPress and its plugins are detected. Hosting provider details are not explicitly available from the HTML content. The site could benefit from improved security configurations and more comprehensive metadata for SEO and accessibility.
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 marvo.li. 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 marvo.li.

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.