Skip to main content

Security report for oakleyarchitects.co.uk

Oakley Architects · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Oakley Architects is a small UK-based architectural firm offering design and architectural services. The website presents a professional but basic digital presence with a focus on refreshing design and service. The site uses a custom PHP backend with jQuery and JavaScript for interactivity and includes a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR. However, the website lacks explicit contact information and detailed business data, which limits user engagement and trust signals. Technically, the website is moderately optimized with HTTPS enabled and basic mobile responsiveness. The absence of security headers and advanced SEO or accessibility features indicates room for improvement in technical maturity. No major vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. From a security perspective, the site has a moderate posture with HTTPS and cookie consent but lacks formal security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to a domain registration error, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy or configuration, though the website content itself appears legitimate. Overall, the website is functional but basic, with moderate risk due to incomplete domain registration data and limited contact information. Strategic improvements in security headers, contact transparency, and technical modernization are recommended to enhance trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  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

  3. 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"

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching oakleyarchitects.co.uk

This scan found 27 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
27
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
58

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

Oakley Architects operates in the Real Estate sector as a small architectural service provider in the UK. The business model focuses on delivering architectural design and consultation services to clients seeking professional architectural solutions. The website indicates a local market position with no evidence of subsidiaries or parent companies. The partnership with Crystal Thought for website design suggests a small ecosystem of collaborators. Revenue streams likely derive from client projects and architectural services. The lack of detailed business information and contact data limits competitive intelligence. Growth indicators and strategic partnerships are not evident from the website content.

Security posture

The security maturity level of the website is moderate. HTTPS is enforced, and a cookie consent mechanism is implemented, indicating awareness of privacy compliance. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No explicit incident response or security policies are published, and no vulnerability disclosure or security.txt file is present. The WHOIS data is missing due to domain registration issues, which could pose risks related to domain control and legitimacy. Overall, the site lacks advanced security controls and formal compliance documentation, representing a moderate security risk.

Recommendations

  1. Implement essential security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against web attacks.
  2. Publish clear security and incident response policies on the website to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Add a security.txt file to facilitate vulnerability disclosure and improve security communication.
  4. Enhance mobile responsiveness and accessibility to improve user experience and compliance.
  5. Provide explicit and verified contact information including emails and phone numbers to increase business credibility and trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Oakley Architects
Description
Oakley Architects is an architectural firm providing design and architectural services. The website emphasizes refreshing design and service.
Key services
Architectural design, Consultation, Project management
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
jQuery, PHP, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security mechanisms.
  2. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain registration error.
  3. Website uses HTTPS and has a cookie consent mechanism.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers are explicitly provided on the homepage.
  5. Privacy policy is present and linked.
  6. No terms of service or security policies are found.
  7. Website uses custom PHP with jQuery and basic JavaScript.
  8. No social media links or explicit contact forms detected.
  9. Site content is minimal with mostly images and navigation links.
  10. No explicit security headers detected in provided data.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a custom PHP platform using jQuery and JavaScript for client-side interactivity. The HTML structure is valid but basic, with minimal dynamic content beyond image slideshows. Performance is moderate with no advanced optimization techniques detected. The site includes a cookie consent popup with JavaScript controls, indicating some compliance with privacy regulations. SEO optimization is basic with canonical links and Open Graph metadata but lacks structured data like JSON-LD. Accessibility features are minimal. Hosting provider and infrastructure details are not discernible from the content. Overall, the technical implementation is functional but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security practices.
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 oakleyarchitects.co.uk. 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 oakleyarchitects.co.uk.

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.