Skip to main content

Security report for massresponse.com

Mass Response Service GmbH · Telecommunications · Austria

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

47/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Mass Response Service GmbH is a medium-sized Austrian telecommunications company specializing in automated mass communication solutions including call centers, SMS, email, fax, and web services. They operate a fiber optic network providing highspeed internet connectivity primarily targeting business customers in Austria. The website content is professional and consistent, with clear navigation and relevant business information. Technically, the site uses Apache and jQuery but lacks modern SSL/TLS configuration, which is a significant security concern. The absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support undermines the security posture despite the presence of some security headers like HSTS. Privacy compliance is basic but present, with cookie consent mechanisms and a privacy policy linked externally. Social media presence and customer testimonials add trust signals. Overall, the site is functional but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 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

6 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

    • 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

  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

  3. 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 X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

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

Keep watching massresponse.com

This scan found 18 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
0
Security headers
30
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
18
Average
47

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

Mass Response holds a strong position in the Austrian telecommunications market as a technological leader in mass communication automation. Their business model focuses on providing scalable communication services and highspeed internet connectivity to enterprises. The partnership with spusu.at indicates a collaborative ecosystem. The company leverages fiber optic infrastructure to differentiate itself. Revenue streams likely include service subscriptions and communication platform usage. The website targets business clients requiring reliable and efficient communication solutions. Growth indicators include network expansion and new service offerings. The company maintains a professional online presence with testimonials and certifications, supporting credibility.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. While some security headers like Strict-Transport-Security are present, they are ineffective without HTTPS. No DNSSEC or CAA records are configured, reducing DNS security. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are found, indicating limited transparency in security management. Cookie consent is implemented, supporting privacy compliance. The site uses no vulnerable libraries but lacks modern TLS protocols and OCSP stapling. Overall, the security maturity is low and requires immediate remediation to meet industry standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or higher) and disable insecure protocols.
  3. Implement DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance DNS security.
  4. Add additional security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options.
  5. Develop and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact information.
  6. Improve mobile optimization and accessibility features to enhance user experience.
  7. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure security and privacy compliance.
  8. Provide explicit company contact emails and phone numbers on the website for transparency.
  9. Enhance privacy policy details to cover data retention and user rights explicitly.
  10. Consider integrating a CMS or modern framework to improve technical maintainability and SEO.
Technical notes

Notes

The website runs on an Apache server and uses jQuery 3.5.1 for client-side scripting. The HTML is valid and structured with meta tags for SEO, but no modern CMS or frameworks are detected. Performance metrics indicate zero load time and resource count, suggesting incomplete data or slow performance. The site lacks HTTPS due to an invalid SSL certificate and no TLS protocols enabled, which is a critical technical deficiency. Cookie consent is implemented via external scripts. External resources are loaded from trusted domains such as Google APIs and Microsoft Clarity. The site is not mobile optimized beyond basic styling and has limited accessibility features. SEO is basic with meta tags but no Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data found. Hosting provider details are not disclosed. Overall, the technical infrastructure is functional but outdated and insecure.
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 massresponse.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 massresponse.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.