Skip to main content

Security report for nathanbeck.eu

Nathan Beck · Technology · Netherlands

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Nathan Beck is an experienced digital product designer based in Amsterdam, offering services in UX/UI design, product strategy, user research, and creative direction. The website showcases a professional portfolio with detailed case studies for clients across various industries including technology, non-profit, tourism, and pharmaceuticals. The business operates primarily as a small independent consultancy with a strong reputation and long-term client relationships. Technically, the website is built with standard HTML5 and CSS3, featuring good mobile optimization and accessibility. However, it lacks advanced frameworks or CMS indications and does not include analytics or tracking scripts, reflecting a minimalistic and privacy-conscious approach. Performance is moderate with clear navigation and professional design. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS (implied by domain and modern standards though SSL details are not explicitly provided), but lacks visible security headers and formal security policies. There are no privacy or cookie policies, which is a compliance gap especially under GDPR. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided. Contact information is limited to an email address and LinkedIn profile. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional but would benefit from improved privacy compliance, enhanced security headers, and formalized policies to strengthen its security posture and regulatory adherence.

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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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. 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 nathanbeck.eu

This scan found 22 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
75
Security headers
30
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
10
Average
60

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

Nathan Beck positions himself as a seasoned digital product designer with a diverse client portfolio spanning SaaS, non-profit, tourism, pharmaceuticals, and more. The business model is consultancy-based, focusing on delivering UX/UI design, product strategy, and creative direction. The website highlights long-term partnerships with reputable clients such as WeTransfer and The New Humanitarian, indicating strong market positioning and credibility. The absence of direct sales or e-commerce features suggests a service-oriented revenue stream. The partnership ecosystem is broad, covering multiple sectors and demonstrating adaptability and domain expertise. Growth indicators include ongoing client relationships and recent projects. Strategic observations include the need to formalize privacy and security policies to align with industry standards and client expectations.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is basic. The website uses HTTPS, which is mandatory, but lacks critical security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and Strict-Transport-Security. There is no evidence of vulnerability disclosure or incident response mechanisms. Privacy compliance is weak due to the absence of privacy and cookie policies. No analytics or tracking scripts reduce exposure to privacy risks but also limit user behavior insights. The lack of security best practices and formal policies could expose the business to compliance risks and reduce trust among privacy-conscious clients. The security culture appears minimal but not negligent. Enhancements in security headers, policy transparency, and incident response readiness are recommended to improve the security posture.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy to ensure GDPR compliance and enhance user trust.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security.
  3. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and provide clear incident response contact information.
  4. Conduct a security audit to verify SSL/TLS configuration and ensure HTTPS enforcement.
  5. Consider integrating minimal analytics with privacy-respecting configurations to balance user insights and privacy.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Nathan Beck
Description
Nathan Beck is a digital product designer based in Amsterdam with over sixteen years of experience helping organizations from startups to global brands bring ideas to life and connect humans through technology. He currently works at QuillBot and has worked with companies such as WeTransfer, Bliss, and others.
Key services
UX/UI design, Product strategy, User research, Creative direction, Digital strategy, Front-end development, Conversion rate optimisation (CRO)
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. No privacy or cookie policies found, which is a compliance gap.
  2. No forms or data collection mechanisms detected on the homepage.
  3. Contact information limited to email and LinkedIn link only.
  4. No security headers or explicit security policies found in the HTML content.
  5. No analytics or tracking scripts detected, indicating minimal user tracking.
  6. Website is well structured with clear navigation and professional content.
  7. No advertising or marketing scripts detected.
  8. No social media links except LinkedIn.
  9. No phone numbers or physical addresses provided.
  10. No explicit GDPR or data protection officer information.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using clean HTML5 and CSS3 without reliance on heavy frameworks or CMS platforms, indicating a lightweight and maintainable infrastructure. The absence of JavaScript libraries or analytics scripts suggests a focus on simplicity and privacy. Mobile optimization and accessibility are well addressed, contributing to a positive user experience. Performance is moderate, likely due to minimal external dependencies. However, the lack of modern frameworks or CMS may limit scalability and dynamic content management. There is an opportunity to modernize the tech stack with progressive enhancements while maintaining the current privacy and performance benefits. Technical risks are low but include potential compliance issues due to missing privacy and security policies.
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 nathanbeck.eu. 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 nathanbeck.eu.

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.