Skip to main content

Security report for nkgtra.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 3 other checks.

Security score

54/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website nkgtra.com is currently a newly registered domain (created June 25, 2024) with no active business content. The site functions as a parked domain displaying related search ads and Google Adsense monetization, indicating it is not yet developed or is held for resale. The technical infrastructure is basic, relying on standard HTML, CSS, and JavaScript with ad network integrations. Security posture is minimal with HTTPS enabled but lacking DNSSEC and security headers. Privacy compliance is weak with a basic privacy policy page but no cookie consent mechanism. No contact or business information is provided, limiting trust and credibility. Overall, the site represents a low-risk parked domain with limited business or security maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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 nkgtra.com

This scan found 28 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
20
Email security
20
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
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 domain does not currently represent an active business entity. It is positioned as a parked domain monetized through advertising networks such as Google Adsense and Bodis. There is no identifiable company name, legal entity, or sector focus. The business model is advertising-based domain parking. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident. The lack of content and contact details suggests the domain is either awaiting development or intended for resale. Market positioning is non-existent and growth indicators are absent.

Security posture

Security maturity is low. The site uses HTTPS but lacks DNSSEC and critical security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options. No incident response or security policies are published. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt files are present. The absence of privacy and cookie consent mechanisms indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations. No sensitive data exposure or vulnerable libraries were detected, but the overall security posture is minimal and should be improved before any active business use.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security.
  2. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to harden the website.
  3. Add a comprehensive cookie consent mechanism to comply with privacy regulations.
  4. Publish clear contact information and business details to improve credibility.
  5. Develop a security policy and incident response plan to enhance security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Description
Website appears to be a parked domain or placeholder page with related search ads and ad blocks, no business description provided.
Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript, Google Adsense, Bodis domain parking
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
45/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense, Bodis
Tracking pixels
Google Ad Services
Marketing tools
Google Adsense
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is a parked domain with no substantive content.
  2. No contact information or business details provided.
  3. No privacy or cookie consent mechanisms implemented.
  4. Site uses Google Adsense and Bodis for monetization.
  5. No security headers or advanced security configurations detected.
  6. WHOIS data shows recent registration with no privacy protection.
  7. No adult or explicit content detected; site is safe for general audiences.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with basic HTML, CSS, and JavaScript and integrates Google Adsense and Bodis domain parking services. The site loads moderately fast but lacks advanced SEO and accessibility features. Mobile optimization is basic but functional. No CMS or advanced frameworks detected. Hosting appears to be via NameCheap or Bodis parking infrastructure. The technical implementation is minimal and typical for a parked domain, with opportunities for modernization and improved security configurations.
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 nkgtra.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 nkgtra.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.