Skip to main content

Security report for merkur-gaming.com

MERKUR GAMING · Technology · Germany

High risk. 8 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

MERKUR GAMING is an international sales and development brand under the German-based Gauselmann Group, specializing in gaming machines, linked progressive jackpots, and related gaming products. The website targets B2B clients in the gaming industry, offering a portfolio of games, cabinets, and linked solutions. The company maintains a consistent and professional brand presence with active social media channels and a corporate website featuring product showcases and news updates. Technically, the website uses a traditional Apache server with a variety of JavaScript libraries including jQuery and Bootstrap, and integrates a Usercentrics consent management platform along with Matomo analytics for privacy-conscious tracking. However, the site lacks HTTPS encryption, which is a critical security vulnerability. Security headers are partially implemented, but the absence of SSL/TLS severely impacts the security posture. Privacy compliance is supported by a cookie consent mechanism and a basic privacy policy, though no explicit security or incident response policies are found. Overall, the website is functional and professional but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and enhance trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

8 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 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. 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 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 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 merkur-gaming.com

This scan found 17 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
45
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
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

The company operates in the technology sector focused on gaming products, leveraging its position as part of the Gauselmann Group to maintain a strong market presence. Its business model centers on product development and sales to gaming operators worldwide. The website content and linked domains confirm a legitimate corporate structure with no suspicious patterns. The presence of a mobile app and linked progressive jackpots indicates innovation and product diversification. The company’s marketing ecosystem includes social media engagement and privacy-conscious analytics, supporting moderate user tracking. The lack of direct contact emails or phone numbers on the site suggests a controlled communication channel, likely via contact forms. The domain registration aligns with the corporate identity, reinforcing legitimacy.

Security posture

The website’s security posture is weak due to the absence of HTTPS, which exposes users to potential interception and data tampering. While some security headers like X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Referrer-Policy are set, the lack of SSL/TLS negates many benefits. No advanced security policies or incident response contacts are published, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The use of Usercentrics for cookie consent and Matomo for analytics shows some privacy awareness, but the critical missing HTTPS implementation is a major risk. There are no signs of vulnerable libraries or exposed sensitive data, but the site should prioritize enabling HTTPS and enhancing security headers to improve trust and compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS site-wide immediately.
  2. Enable HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Publish explicit security and incident response policies including contact channels for abuse or security issues.
  4. Regularly update and audit all JavaScript libraries and plugins to avoid vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance by providing detailed data retention policies and a dedicated data protection officer contact.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on an Apache server with a traditional tech stack including jQuery 1.11.2 and Bootstrap CSS. It uses multiple jQuery plugins for UI enhancements and media handling. The site is mobile responsive and includes a Usercentrics CMP for cookie consent and Matomo for analytics, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. However, the lack of HTTPS and modern TLS protocols is a significant technical debt and security risk. Performance metrics are unavailable, but the site includes multiple external CSS and JS resources hosted on styles.gauselmann.com, suggesting centralized asset management. The CMS appears to be FirstSpirit based on content clues. Overall, the infrastructure is functional but requires modernization and security upgrades.
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 merkur-gaming.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 merkur-gaming.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.