Skip to main content

Security report for naviga4.cz

Naviga 4, s.r.o. · Government · Czech Republic

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Naviga 4, s.r.o. is a Czech consulting firm specializing in strategic market expansion and technological innovation, serving both private and public sectors. With over 20 years of experience, it positions itself as a leading advisor in its domain, offering services such as foreign market entry assistance, UAV startup investments, technology education, and Industry 4.0 manufacturing transformation. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear contact channels and GDPR-compliant privacy and cookie policies. Technically, the site employs modern tracking tools like Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel, integrates Google reCAPTCHA for form security, and uses HTTPS with good SSL configuration. However, explicit security headers and published security policies are absent, which could be improved to enhance security posture. The WHOIS data is unavailable, which slightly reduces domain trustworthiness, but the overall business credibility remains high based on website content and contact information.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

8 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

    • 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

  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 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 naviga4.cz

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
72
Security headers
50
Email security
80
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
25
Average
54

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 targets clients in both private and public sectors seeking consulting services for market expansion and innovation. Its business model revolves around providing expert advisory services with a focus on practical value and avoiding unnecessary formalism. The firm leverages its long-standing market presence and partnerships with foreign companies to maintain a competitive advantage. The website's integration with marketing and analytics tools indicates an active approach to client engagement and lead generation. The presence of a newsletter subscription and social media links suggests ongoing communication with its audience. No direct revenue streams or parent/subsidiary relationships are evident from the data.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate to good security posture with HTTPS enforced and use of Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms from automated abuse. Cookie consent mechanisms are implemented in compliance with GDPR. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy (CSP), HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), and X-Frame-Options reduces defense-in-depth. No explicit security or incident response policies are published, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present. The lack of WHOIS data also raises minor concerns about domain registration transparency. Overall, the site is secure for typical business use but could benefit from enhanced security controls and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response contact information.
  2. Add security headers including CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to improve protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Ensure WHOIS data is complete and publicly available to improve domain trustworthiness.
  5. Regularly review and update privacy and cookie policies to maintain GDPR compliance and transparency.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Naviga 4, s.r.o.
Registration number
26756102
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Naviga 4, s.r.o.
Description
Jsme přední poradenská firma působící v oblasti strategické expanze na trhy a technologických inovací v Česku. Přes 20 let poskytujeme profesionální služby soukromému i veřejnému sektoru. Spolupracujeme s klienty, kteří se snaží vstoupit na nové trhy nebo inovovat své podnikání, přičemž využíváme naše hluboké znalosti potřeb obou stran. Díky tomu mají naše služby skutečnou přidanou hodnotu pro všechny zúčastněné. Jsme respektovaným partnerem i pro zahraniční společnosti.
Key services
Pomoc se vstupem na zahraniční trhy, Investice do start-upů v oblasti UAV, Vzdělávání v oblasti technologií a vývoje produktů, Industry 4.0: Transformace a optimalizace výroby
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Google reCAPTCHA, FontAwesome, jQuery
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
Sklik Conversion, Sklik Retargeting, Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable, which is unusual and reduces domain trust score.
  3. Website uses modern tracking and consent mechanisms compliant with GDPR.
  4. Contact information is clearly presented with multiple channels.
  5. No explicit security policies or incident response info published.
  6. Website content is professional, relevant, and safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Facebook Pixel, and Google reCAPTCHA for analytics and security. The presence of data-nette-rules attributes suggests the use of the Nette Framework for backend form validation. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and good navigation clarity. Performance is moderate with video backgrounds and multiple scripts, but no major issues detected. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD BreadcrumbList). Accessibility is basic but could be improved. Hosting provider is not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical implementation supports a professional and functional user experience with room for optimization in security headers and accessibility.
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 naviga4.cz. 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 naviga4.cz.

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.