Skip to main content

Security report for neoweb.fr

Neoweb · Technology · France

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view and Security headers.

Security score

50/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Neoweb is a French digital agency established in 2004, specializing in custom web and mobile application development, consulting, and accessibility services. The company targets startups, enterprises, and institutions primarily in Lille and Paris, leveraging technologies such as React, Symfony, WordPress, and Directus. Their website reflects a mature digital presence with professional design, rich content, and structured data enhancing SEO and user experience. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with Elementor and Gravity Forms, incorporating modern JavaScript libraries and optimization tools like WP Rocket. However, a critical security gap exists due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support and lack of modern TLS protocols, which significantly impacts the site's security posture. Privacy compliance is well addressed with GDPR-aligned cookie consent and privacy policies. Overall, the site demonstrates strong business credibility and technical maturity but requires urgent remediation of its SSL/TLS configuration to ensure secure user interactions.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

  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 neoweb.fr

This scan found 19 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
50
Security headers
15
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
50

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

Neoweb positions itself as a specialized technology service provider in the web development sector, focusing on bespoke digital solutions with an emphasis on performance, accessibility, and eco-design. Their client portfolio and testimonials indicate a stable market presence and trusted partnerships. The business model revolves around project-based engagements and consulting services, targeting a medium-sized enterprise segment. The company leverages a multi-technology stack to cater to diverse client needs, maintaining competitive advantages through technical expertise and long-term client relationships. The website's content and navigation are optimized for lead generation and client engagement, supported by integrated contact forms and clear service offerings.

Security posture

The current security posture of the website is moderate but compromised by the lack of HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. While the site employs Google reCAPTCHA v3 to protect forms from spam and includes some security headers, it lacks critical SSL/TLS configurations such as valid certificates, HSTS, and OCSP stapling. No explicit security policies or incident response contacts are published, which may affect trust and compliance. The absence of vulnerabilities like subdomain takeover and outdated libraries is positive, but the fundamental encryption deficiency is a major concern. Compliance with GDPR is supported by cookie consent mechanisms and privacy policies, but overall security hygiene needs improvement.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site immediately.
  2. Enable and configure modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable insecure protocols.
  3. Activate HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  4. Enable OCSP stapling to improve certificate revocation checking performance and security.
  5. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  6. Regularly audit and update all third-party plugins and libraries to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  7. Enhance monitoring and logging to detect and respond to security incidents promptly.
  8. Maintain and document GDPR compliance with transparent data retention and processing policies.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on OVHcloud and built on WordPress CMS using PHP 8.2. It employs Elementor for page building and Gravity Forms for data collection, integrating Google reCAPTCHA v3 for spam prevention. The front-end uses modern JavaScript libraries including Swiper.js and Bootstrap. WP Rocket is used for performance optimization, although no explicit load time or resource metrics were available. The site is mobile responsive and includes accessibility features such as skip links and ARIA roles. SEO is well implemented with meta tags, Open Graph, and JSON-LD structured data. DNS records show use of Google Workspace for email services. The main technical risk is the missing SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which undermines secure communications.
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 neoweb.fr. 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 neoweb.fr.

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.