Security report for media-stands.eu
Cecoforma S.A · Media · Belgium
Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.
Media-stands.eu is a specialized service provider organizing umbrella stands for European independent audiovisual and film market participants at major international events such as MIPTV, Marché du Film, MIFA, MIPCOM, Series Mania Festival, and the European Film Market. The website represents the interests of the Creative Europe MEDIA Programme and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency, positioning itself as an official and trusted partner in the European media sector. The business operates primarily from Belgium and targets audiovisual professionals seeking exhibition opportunities at key industry markets. Technically, the website employs modern front-end technologies including Font Awesome, Bootstrap, and Swiper.js, with a responsive design optimized for mobile devices. Cookie consent mechanisms are implemented to comply with GDPR requirements, and analytics scripts are present but commented out, reflecting a privacy-conscious approach. The site demonstrates good SEO and accessibility basics but lacks advanced security headers and explicit security policy documentation. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS (implied by the URL), has no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data, and implements cookie consent. However, it lacks a published security policy, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. No WAF or blocking mechanisms were detected, and the WHOIS data is consistent with a legitimate domain registration. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in formal security documentation and headers. The overall risk assessment is low, with the site appearing trustworthy and professionally maintained. Strategic recommendations include enhancing HTTP security headers, publishing a security policy and vulnerability disclosure, and verifying SSL/TLS configurations to strengthen security and compliance posture.
Scanned
NIS2 and GDPR posture
- GDPR outside view
- 43/ 100 · High
- Checks completed
- 7of 7
NIS2 Art. 21(2)
- (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
- (b) Incident handling: One indicator
- (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
- (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
- (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
- (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
- (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
- (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
- (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
- (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.
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 Cookie Policy found
GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage
What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes
- Critical
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
- RFC 6797 §6.1.1
- Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: hsts_min_age 63072000
- NIS2 21(2)(h)
- IR 2024/2690 9.2(a): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(a): Cryptography
- NIST SC-8: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-8: Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
- High
Missing X-Frame-Options header
Prevents clickjacking attacks
What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"
- CWE-1021
- OWASP A06:2025
- CAPEC-103
- ASVS V3.4.6
- OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends X-Frame-Options: deny
- RFC 7034
- High
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.
- High
No SPF record found
SPF helps prevent email spoofing
What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"
- RFC 7208
- NIS2 21(2)(e)
- IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(k): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(k): Network security
- NIST SP 800-177r1
- High
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
Keep watching media-stands.eu
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. 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
- 95
- Security headers
- 30
- Email security
- 55
- DNS health
- 85
- Network security
- 20
- GDPR outside view
- 43
- Average
- 55
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
Security posture
Recommendations
- Implement and enforce HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
- Publish a clear security policy and incident response plan on the website to improve transparency and preparedness.
- Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
- Regularly audit SSL/TLS configuration to ensure strong encryption and compliance with best practices.
- Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic security training to foster a stronger security culture.
Contact details published on the site
- Addresses
- Legal name
- Cecoforma S.A
Site observations
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Business
- Company
- Cecoforma S.A
- Description
- Organises umbrella stands to host European independents at international audiovisual and film markets on behalf of the Creative Europe MEDIA Programme of the European Union and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency.
- Key services
- Organizing MEDIA umbrella stands at MIPTV (Cannes), Marché du Film (Cannes), MIFA (Annecy), MIPCOM (Cannes), Series Mania Festival (Lille), European Film Market (Berlin)
- Content quality
- good
- Branding
- consistent
Technology
- Stack
- Font Awesome 6.0.0, Bootstrap (implied by navbar classes), Swiper.js, CookieConsent.js
- Performance
- moderate
- Mobile
- good
- Accessibility
- basic
- SEO
- good
Security
- Observed score
- 70/100
- Good practices seen
- Cookie consent mechanism implemented
- No exposed sensitive data in HTML
- No inline scripts with suspicious content
Analytics and tracking
- Services
- Google Analytics (commented out), Matomo (commented out)
- Tracking level
- minimal
- Privacy practices
- good
Advertising
- Tracking pixels
- Matomo (commented out), Google Analytics (commented out)
- Marketing tools
- Sendinblue forms (sibforms.com)
- Transparency
- basic
Site quality
- Design
- good
- User experience
- good
- Content relevance
- good
- Navigation
- good
- Professionalism
- good
- Trustworthiness
- high
Key observations
- Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
- Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with clear user options.
- No explicit terms of service page found.
- Contact information is clearly presented with professional email and phone.
- No social media links detected.
- No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure found.
- Analytics scripts are present but commented out, indicating privacy consideration.
- Website uses modern front-end libraries and responsive design.
- No signs of adult or questionable content.
- WHOIS data is minimal but consistent with domain legitimacy.
Technical notes
Notes
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.
- MITRE CWE (opens in a new tab)4.20 (2026-04-30) · CWE Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP Top 10:2025 (opens in a new tab)2025 (membership per CWE 4.20) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- MITRE CAPEC (opens in a new tab)3.9 (2023-01-24) · CAPEC Terms of Use (free use with attribution, © MITRE)
- OWASP ASVS (opens in a new tab)5.0.0 · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (opens in a new tab)latest (checklist.json, master) · CC BY-SA 4.0
- OWASP Secure Headers Project (opens in a new tab)2026-10-18 · Apache-2.0
- Mozilla Server Side TLS (intermediate) (opens in a new tab)6.0 · MPL-2.0
- NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 (OSCAL catalog) (opens in a new tab)5.2.0 · Public domain (US Government work)
- Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 333, 27.12.2022 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 (opens in a new tab)OJ L, 18.10.2024 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 119, 4.5.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive 2002/58/EC (ePrivacy), consolidated (opens in a new tab)19.12.2009 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- RFC Editor metadata (opens in a new tab)per-RFC (obsolete RFCs rejected) · IETF Trust Legal Provisions (metadata only)
- NIST CSRC, W3C TR, IETF Datatracker, EDPB, EUR-Lex CELLAR and gesetze-bayern.de (opens in a new tab)per document · Titles and links only
- NIST NVD CVE API 2.0 (opens in a new tab)live records · Public domain (NVD); CVE® records © MITRE, free use
- W3C WCAG 2.2 (opens in a new tab)W3C Recommendation (wcag.json) · W3C Software and Document License
- ETSI EN 301 549 (opens in a new tab)V3.2.1 (2021-03), clause headings · Clause numbers and titles only (© ETSI)
- Directive (EU) 2019/882 (European Accessibility Act) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 151, 7.6.2019 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
- Directive (EU) 2016/2102 (Web Accessibility Directive) (opens in a new tab)OJ L 327, 2.12.2016 · EUR-Lex reuse under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU (© European Union)
Retrieved 2026-10-25
Feedback on this report
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with media-stands.eu. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review media-stands.eu.