Skip to main content

Security report for metrosafety.co.uk

Metro Safety · Real Estate · United Kingdom

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

38/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Metro Safety is a UK-based company specializing in fire, health, and safety compliance services targeted primarily at property professionals including managing agents, retailers, local authorities, and social housing providers. The company positions itself as a leading provider in the UK market with a comprehensive service offering that includes risk assessments, testing, maintenance, consultancy, and training. Their digital presence reflects a mature business with a professional website built on Joomla CMS and enhanced by modern UIkit frameworks. The site is mobile optimized and provides clear navigation and relevant content, supporting their market position and business model effectively. From a security perspective, the website employs HTTPS and includes CSRF tokens, but lacks some advanced security headers and explicit incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies. Privacy compliance is partially addressed with a cookie and privacy policy page, though no active consent mechanism is present. Overall, the website demonstrates a solid business credibility and technical foundation with room for improvement in privacy and security transparency.

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

9 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 metrosafety.co.uk

This scan found 20 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
55
Email security
85
DNS health
60
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
38

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

Metro Safety operates in the real estate compliance sector, serving a broad range of clients across the UK. Their business model is service-oriented, focusing on compliance cycles, safety testing, and training. The company leverages digital tools such as the Safety SMART platform and customer portals to enhance client engagement. Their market positioning is strong, supported by long-term client relationships and industry accreditations. The company’s growth is indicated by a large property portfolio served and a diversified service offering. Partnerships with platforms like SR Manager and use of Salesforce-based portals suggest integration with industry-standard tools. The company’s communications emphasize trust, expertise, and cost-effective compliance solutions, targeting property professionals who require reliable safety services.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with HTTPS enforced and CSRF tokens implemented. However, the absence of explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces the overall security robustness. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The lack of visible incident response contacts or vulnerability disclosure policies indicates a gap in security transparency and readiness. The use of third-party scripts like Google Analytics and Tag Manager introduces typical tracking risks but no direct vulnerabilities were observed. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the business type but could be enhanced by implementing recommended headers and clearer security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and enforce security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Add a visible cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  3. Publish clear terms of service and incident response policy pages including security contact emails to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to minimize potential vulnerabilities and privacy risks.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct periodic security assessments to maintain and improve overall website security and compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Metro Inspection Services Limited
Registration number
03357802
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Metro Safety
Description
Metro Safety provide simple, cost effective fire, health & safety compliance services to many of the UK's leading property professionals
Key services
Fire Safety, Water Safety, Asbestos Services, Health & Safety Compliance, Training, Environmental Services, Building Maintenance / PPM, Safety SMART
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Joomla CMS, Yootheme Pro, UIkit, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
UIkit
Platforms
Joomla
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • CSRF token present in scripts
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and content rich
  2. Clear focus on fire, health & safety compliance services
  3. Strong UK market presence with over 20,000 properties served
  4. Use of Joomla CMS with modern UIkit framework
  5. Google Analytics and Tag Manager used for tracking
  6. No visible security or privacy policy pages explicitly linked except cookie/privacy policy
  7. No visible terms of service or incident response contacts
  8. Contact information is clear and includes phone numbers and physical address
  9. No WAF or blocking detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Joomla CMS with Yootheme Pro templates and UIkit frontend framework, indicating a modern and maintainable technical stack. The use of Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager shows integration of standard analytics and marketing tools. Performance appears moderate with responsive design for mobile devices. The site uses valid meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for SEO benefits. However, some technical improvements could be made in accessibility and security header implementation. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports the business needs effectively but could benefit from modernization in security and privacy features.
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 metrosafety.co.uk. 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 metrosafety.co.uk.

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.