Skip to main content

Security report for mycybergroup.com

cyber-Wear Heidelberg GmbH · Retail · Germany

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

cyber-Wear Heidelberg GmbH is a German-based company specializing in merchandise, promotional products, corporate fashion, and corporate workwear. Established in 1994, the company offers a full-service business model targeting other businesses seeking high-quality branded merchandise and sustainable corporate solutions. Their website showcases a professional digital presence with multimedia content, client references from major brands, and a strong emphasis on sustainability and corporate responsibility. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with Elementor and includes modern features such as Google reCAPTCHA and a consent management platform, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS and spam protection, though some security headers and explicit policies are missing. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises some concerns about domain legitimacy, but the overall business credibility and content quality remain high. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing security and incident response policies, and improving transparency around domain registration.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

6 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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching mycybergroup.com

This scan found 27 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
65
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
53
Average
51

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 retail and manufacturing sectors, focusing on B2B merchandise and promotional products. Their market position is supported by notable clients such as AUDI, DEUTSCHE BAHN, and PORSCHE, indicating strong industry relationships. The business model revolves around full-service solutions including e-shop platforms and incentive programs. Growth indicators include a sustainability report and active career listings. The partnership ecosystem includes related media and project sites, enhancing brand reach. The company targets corporate clients seeking sustainable and innovative merchandise solutions. The website content and structure reflect a professional and consistent branding approach.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security maturity level with HTTPS enforced and Google reCAPTCHA protecting forms. Consent management via Usercentrics indicates GDPR compliance. However, the lack of security headers such as CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options, and absence of a security.txt or incident response page, represent gaps in security best practices. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the content. The missing WHOIS data is a concern for domain legitimacy but does not directly impact website security. Overall, the security posture is adequate for the business type but could be improved with additional policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy and incident response page to improve transparency and preparedness.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve trust.
  4. Verify and publish domain registration details to enhance legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Continue maintaining GDPR compliance and enhance privacy notices with clear data retention policies.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
cyber-Wear Heidelberg GmbH
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
cyber-Wear Heidelberg GmbH
Description
cyber-Wear Heidelberg GmbH is a company specializing in merchandise, promotional products, corporate fashion, and corporate workwear. They offer full-service solutions including e-shop solutions and incentives. The company emphasizes sustainability and quality production.
Key services
Full-Service Merchandise, Werbeartikel (Promotional Products), Merchandising, Corporate Fashion, Corporate Workwear, E-Shop Solutions, Prämien & Incentives
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.3, Elementor 3.25.10, jQuery 3.7.1, Google reCAPTCHA v3, bdthemes-prime-slider-lite, Elementskit-lite
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Google reCAPTCHA v3 on contact form
  • Consent management via Usercentrics CMP

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Marketing tools
Usercentrics Consent Management Platform
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich multimedia content including videos and image carousels.
  2. Content is primarily in German with English alternate versions available.
  3. Strong emphasis on sustainability and corporate responsibility.
  4. Contact information is clearly presented with phone, email, physical address, and contact form.
  5. No visible security.txt or explicit security policy pages.
  6. No terms of service page found.
  7. Uses modern WordPress CMS with Elementor builder and several plugins.
  8. Implements Google reCAPTCHA v3 for spam protection on forms.
  9. Consent management via Usercentrics CMP is active, indicating GDPR compliance.
  10. No signs of adult or questionable content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress CMS platform using Elementor page builder and several plugins for enhanced functionality such as sliders and language switching. The use of Google Fonts, jQuery, and Google reCAPTCHA v3 indicates a contemporary tech stack. Performance is moderate with multimedia content including videos and image carousels. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. Accessibility is basic but could be improved with more ARIA roles and semantic HTML. SEO optimization is basic with meta tags present but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected. Hosting provider details are not evident from the content. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a professional business website but has room for modernization and optimization.
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 mycybergroup.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 mycybergroup.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.