Skip to main content

Security report for meteo.be

Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium (RMI) · Government · Belgium

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium (RMI) operates the website www.meteo.be, providing authoritative meteorological data, forecasts, warnings, and research for Belgium. As a government entity, it serves a broad audience including the general public, researchers, and governmental bodies. The site offers comprehensive weather-related services such as forecasts, observations, pollen allergy information, UV index data, and live webcams. The organization holds recognized certifications including ISO9001 and EMAS, underscoring its commitment to quality and environmental management. Technically, the website employs modern web technologies including jQuery, Web Components, and Google reCAPTCHA, alongside Matomo analytics for user tracking. The site is mobile-optimized, accessible, and SEO-friendly, with a professional design and clear navigation. HTTPS is enforced, ensuring secure communications, though some security headers could be improved. Privacy and cookie policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, with a clear cookie consent mechanism. Security posture is solid with no visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data. The WHOIS data is restricted due to domain privacy policies, but the domain and website content strongly indicate legitimacy and trustworthiness. Social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram further supports credibility. Overall, the website demonstrates a high level of professionalism, security, and compliance appropriate for a government meteorological institute. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing a security policy or incident response page, and considering a vulnerability disclosure program to further strengthen trust and security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

4 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
    • 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';…

  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.

    • 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 meteo.be

This scan found 24 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
67
Security headers
15
Email security
55
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
68

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

RMI holds a strong market position as Belgium's official meteorological institute, providing essential public services in weather forecasting and climate research. Its business model is government-funded, focusing on delivering accurate and timely meteorological information. The target audience spans the general public, researchers, and government agencies. The organization benefits from certifications and an eco-label, enhancing its reputation. Partnerships with Belgian government bodies and scientific organizations are evident. The website's content and services indicate a mature digital presence with ongoing innovation in meteorological data delivery.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, use of Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, and a cookie consent mechanism aligned with privacy regulations. However, the absence of explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options suggests room for improvement. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. The lack of a published security policy or incident response information limits transparency. Overall, the site aligns well with GDPR and general security best practices but could enhance its security maturity by adopting additional headers and formalizing incident response disclosures.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web vulnerabilities.
  2. Publish a clear security policy and incident response page to improve transparency and user trust.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure program or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to ensure no vulnerable components are included.
  5. Enhance monitoring and logging capabilities to detect and respond to security incidents promptly.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium (RMI)
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium (RMI)
Description
The Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium provides weather forecasts, observations, warnings, and research related to meteorology in Belgium.
Key services
Weather forecasts, Weather observations, Weather warnings, Meteorological research, Pollen allergy forecasts, UV index information, Webcams and snowcams
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, pako, rangeslider, slick, Google reCAPTCHA, Matomo analytics, Web Components, Polyfills for Web Components
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA for forms
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Matomo, Google Analytics (via script mention)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Matomo
Transparency
excellent

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is a government meteorological institute site with comprehensive weather data and forecasts.
  2. Content is rich, well-structured, and professionally presented.
  3. Privacy and cookie policies are present and detailed.
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
  5. WHOIS data is restricted but domain appears legitimate.
  6. Use of modern web technologies and analytics tools.
  7. Social media presence on major platforms.
  8. No detected security headers but HTTPS is enforced.
  9. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including jQuery, Web Components, and polyfills to support a wide range of browsers. It integrates Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection and Matomo for analytics, indicating a focus on security and privacy. The site is mobile-optimized and accessible, with good SEO practices evident from meta tags and structured data. Performance is moderate, with room for optimization in loading times and resource management. Hosting details are not explicitly identified, but the use of HTTPS and external trusted services suggests a reliable infrastructure. Technical debt appears low, though continuous modernization and security enhancements are recommended.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 68/100Medium30 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with meteo.be. 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 meteo.be.

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.