Skip to main content

Security report for nano.no

Sidespeilet Utvikling · Other · Norway

High risk. 9 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

48/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website nano.no, titled 'Sidespeilet Utvikling', appears to be a small-scale service provider focused on remote support solutions, primarily offering TeamViewer QuickSupport downloads. The business is likely operated by an individual named Tom Øyvind Hogstad, based in Norway, with contact details provided directly on the site. The site content is minimal and primarily serves as a download portal rather than a full corporate website. From a technical perspective, the website is built with basic HTML and CSS, lacking modern frameworks or CMS platforms. There is no evidence of advanced analytics, tracking, or advertising technologies. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic, and SEO features are minimal. The site does not include privacy or cookie policies, nor terms of service, which limits its compliance posture. Security posture is weak due to the apparent absence of HTTPS enforcement and security headers. No forms or data collection mechanisms are present, reducing exposure to input-based vulnerabilities but also limiting user engagement. The WHOIS data is consistent with the website's business profile and origin, indicating legitimacy but a small operational scale. Overall, the website scores low to moderate in content quality, technical implementation, security, and privacy compliance. Strategic improvements in security (HTTPS, headers), privacy policies, and technical modernization would enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection
    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: PostgreSQL

      Port 5432 (PostgreSQL) is publicly accessible - PostgreSQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to PostgreSQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  2. 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';…

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

Keep watching nano.no

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
72
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
50
Average
48

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 · found on this site
  • 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 business behind nano.no operates in a niche remote support service segment, leveraging TeamViewer technology to provide quick support downloads. The business model is service-oriented, targeting individuals or small businesses needing remote IT assistance. The use of a personal Gmail address and minimal web presence suggests a small or sole proprietorship operation. Market positioning is modest with no evident partnerships or certifications. Growth potential may be limited without expanded digital presence or service offerings. The company is likely self-funded or small-scale with no parent or subsidiary relationships evident.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is low. The absence of HTTPS and security headers exposes users to potential interception and clickjacking risks. Lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present. The site does not collect user data via forms, reducing some risk but also limiting engagement. Overall, the security culture appears minimal, with significant room for improvement to meet basic security and compliance standards.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all communications.
  2. Add standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR.
  4. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency.
  5. Enhance website technical infrastructure with modern frameworks and improve SEO and accessibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Sidespeilet Utvikling
Description
The website appears to represent a small business or individual offering remote support services via TeamViewer QuickSupport downloads. Contact details for Tom Øyvind Hogstad are provided, suggesting a personal or small business operation.
Key services
Remote support via TeamViewer QuickSupport
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website is a simple landing page focused on providing TeamViewer QuickSupport downloads.
  2. Contact information is clearly presented but uses a personal Gmail address rather than a company domain email.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  4. No security headers or HTTPS status provided; likely missing or unknown.
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  6. No forms or data collection mechanisms present.
  7. Minimal SEO and accessibility features.
  8. No advertising or marketing tools detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic HTML and CSS without detectable CMS or JavaScript frameworks. No analytics or tracking scripts are present, indicating minimal technical complexity. Performance is likely moderate given the simple content. Mobile optimization is basic but functional. The lack of HTTPS and security headers is a critical technical deficiency. There is no evidence of technical debt but also no modernization. Hosting provider and platform details are not discernible from the provided data.
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 nano.no. 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 nano.no.

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.