Skip to main content

Security report for mcore.sk

Martin Šimko · Technology · Slovakia

Medium risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

57/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Martin Šimko operates as a freelance fullstack web developer based in Slovakia, offering services including website creation, custom web applications, and accessibility compliance primarily for public sector clients. The business is small, independent, and has been established since 2012, with a focus on long-term client relationships and quality service delivery. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear contact details but lacks formal privacy and cookie policies, which are important for compliance and trust. Technically, the website employs a modern technology stack including PHP frameworks (Yii 2, Laravel, Symfony), JavaScript libraries (Vue.js, Alpine.js), and OctoberCMS as the preferred CMS. Hosting is provided by Websupport, indicated by the domain's nameservers. The site is mobile optimized, accessible, and uses HTTPS with DNSSEC enabled, reflecting a good digital maturity level. However, there is room for improvement in SEO and performance optimization. From a security perspective, the site benefits from HTTPS and DNSSEC but lacks visible security headers and formal security policies. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which could be a risk for handling security incidents. No tracking or analytics scripts were detected, indicating minimal user tracking and a privacy-conscious approach, though the absence of privacy and cookie policies is a compliance gap. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance, security policy transparency, and additional security hardening measures to improve its security posture and regulatory adherence.

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

10 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

    • 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

  2. 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
    • 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 mcore.sk

This scan found 26 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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
80
DNS health
40
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
57

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 is positioned as a niche freelance web developer specializing in custom web solutions and accessibility compliance, targeting clients including public sector organizations. The business model is service-based, relying on project work and long-term collaborations. The absence of social media and limited marketing tools suggests a focus on direct client relationships rather than broad digital marketing. The domain age and DNSSEC usage indicate stability and a commitment to security. Growth potential may be enhanced by formalizing compliance documentation and expanding digital presence. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident from the data.

Security posture

The security maturity is moderate with HTTPS and DNSSEC implemented, which are strong foundational controls. However, the lack of security headers, absence of a published security policy, and no incident response contacts reduce the overall security posture. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The minimal use of third-party scripts reduces attack surface but also limits analytics and marketing capabilities. Compliance gaps exist due to missing privacy and cookie policies, which are critical under GDPR. The site would benefit from implementing security best practices such as security.txt, CSP headers, and formal incident response procedures.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to ensure GDPR compliance and build user trust.
  2. Implement security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Add a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible security reporting.
  4. Provide clear incident response contact information to improve security incident handling and transparency.
  5. Regularly review and update third-party libraries and scripts to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Martin Šimko
Description
Freelancer web developer offering web pages, custom web applications, and accessibility compliance services, with a preference for OctoberCMS.
Key services
Web stránky, Webové aplikácie, Prístupnosť
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML, CSS (less), JavaScript, jQuery, OOP PHP, Yii 2, Laravel, Nette, Symfony, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Vue.js, Alpine.js, REST API, GitHub, GitLab
Frameworks
Yii 2, Laravel, Nette, Symfony, OctoberCMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled (implied by https URLs)
  • DNSSEC enabled on domain

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. No privacy or cookie policy found, which is a compliance gap.
  2. No terms of service or security policy published.
  3. Contact information is clearly provided with company domain email and phone number.
  4. No social media links detected.
  5. No forms present on the homepage to collect user data.
  6. Website uses modern web fonts and combined CSS files for performance.
  7. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  8. Website is mobile optimized and accessible with skip links.
  9. WHOIS data shows domain is active and DNSSEC enabled, indicating good domain security posture.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern and diverse technology stack with PHP frameworks (Yii 2, Laravel, Symfony), JavaScript libraries (Vue.js, Alpine.js), and OctoberCMS as the CMS platform. The hosting provider is Websupport, inferred from the nameservers. The site loads combined CSS files and uses Google Fonts for typography. Mobile optimization and accessibility features such as skip links are implemented, enhancing user experience. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags present but no Open Graph or structured data detected. Performance is moderate, with potential improvements in caching and resource optimization. No analytics or tracking scripts were found, indicating minimal data collection. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could be enhanced with SEO and security 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 mcore.sk. 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 mcore.sk.

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.