Skip to main content

Security report for napec-portal.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

53/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website napec-portal.com serves as a login portal for NAPEC, presumably the Nigerian Association of Petroleum Explorationists or a related entity. The portal is designed for members or authorized users to access their profiles and services. The site is built using Angular 14 framework and incorporates Usercentrics for cookie consent management, indicating some attention to privacy compliance. However, the public-facing content is minimal, focusing solely on login functionality without detailed business or contact information. The domain is recently registered in April 2023, consistent with a new portal launch. From a technical perspective, the site uses modern web technologies including Angular and Bootstrap for styling. DNS is managed via Google Domains, and the domain registrar is Squarespace Domains II LLC. The site shows moderate performance and basic mobile optimization but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. No CMS or hosting provider details are explicitly found. Cookie consent is implemented via Usercentrics, but Google Analytics is present only in commented form, indicating limited active tracking. Security posture is moderate but could be improved. HTTPS is implied but no explicit security headers such as CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options are detected in the HTML content. The login form lacks visible anti-CSRF tokens or advanced input security measures. No privacy policy, terms of service, or incident response contacts are published, which limits compliance and user trust. The domain registration is consistent and shows no suspicious patterns, but the lack of detailed business information and security policies reduces overall trustworthiness. Overall, the website is functional as a login portal but lacks comprehensive privacy, security, and business transparency features. Strategic improvements in security headers, privacy documentation, and contact information publication are recommended to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

7 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 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 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

    • 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 napec-portal.com

This scan found 25 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
72
Security headers
30
Email security
60
DNS health
80
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
35
Average
53

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 portal targets members or users affiliated with NAPEC, likely professionals in the petroleum exploration sector. The business model appears to be membership or user account management, providing access to personalized services or information. The site is newly established, indicating a growth phase. There is no visible partnership or subsidiary information, and no direct revenue streams or commercial activities are evident from the public content. The minimalistic approach suggests a focus on secure access rather than marketing or customer acquisition. The lack of detailed business data limits competitive analysis but suggests a niche, essential service for a defined user base.

Security posture

Security maturity is basic to moderate. The site uses HTTPS and a reputable domain registrar and DNS provider, which are positive indicators. However, the absence of security headers and privacy policies, combined with minimal visible security controls on forms, indicates gaps in security best practices. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, which could hinder timely handling of security issues. The use of Usercentrics for cookie consent shows some privacy awareness, but overall compliance with GDPR or other regulations is not clearly demonstrated. The site would benefit from implementing standard security headers, publishing privacy and security policies, and enhancing form security to reduce risk.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive HTTP security headers including Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  2. Publish clear and accessible privacy policy and terms of service documents to improve compliance and user trust.
  3. Add contact information including support and security incident response channels to facilitate communication and transparency.
  4. Enable DNSSEC to enhance domain name system security.
  5. Incorporate anti-CSRF tokens and input validation in login forms to prevent common web vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Login portal for NAPEC (likely Nigerian Association of Petroleum Explorationists and related entity)
Key services
User login and profile management
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Angular 14, Usercentrics Consent Management, Bootstrap CSS, SweetAlert2, Google Domains DNS
Frameworks
Angular
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS implied by URL
  • Use of Usercentrics for cookie consent

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Usercentrics Consent Management
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a login portal for NAPEC with minimal public content
  2. No privacy policy or terms of service found
  3. Cookie consent managed by Usercentrics
  4. No contact information or business details publicly available
  5. No visible security headers or advanced security controls
  6. Domain is recently registered and uses reputable registrar and DNS
  7. No signs of WAF or blocking mechanisms
  8. No analytics scripts actively loaded (Google Analytics commented out)
  9. Basic design and user interface with Angular framework
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Angular 14 with Bootstrap CSS for styling and uses Usercentrics for cookie consent management. The domain is registered with Squarespace Domains II LLC and DNS is managed via Google Domains. The site loads multiple JavaScript modules and stylesheets indicating a modular modern frontend architecture. Performance is moderate with no explicit indicators of slow loading but no advanced optimization detected. Mobile optimization is basic, and accessibility features are minimal. SEO optimization is basic with standard meta tags but no Open Graph or JSON-LD structured data found. The absence of CMS suggests a custom or framework-based build. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern but could benefit from enhanced performance tuning, accessibility improvements, and SEO enhancements.
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 napec-portal.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 napec-portal.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.