Skip to main content

Security report for oblin.at

OBLIN Rechtsanwälte GmbH · Other · Austria

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

33/100

Risk levelHigh

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

OBLIN Rechtsanwälte GmbH is a specialized international law firm focusing on arbitration, litigation, and dispute resolution based in Austria and Germany. The firm targets businesses engaged in cross-border disputes and white collar crime matters, positioning itself as a leading boutique legal service provider with a strong international network and multiple awards. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with comprehensive content about their expertise and team. Technically, the website is built on TYPO3 CMS and served via Apache, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support is a critical security flaw that undermines user trust and data protection. Security headers are partially implemented, but modern TLS protocols and HSTS are missing. Privacy compliance is partially met with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the site demonstrates good business credibility but requires urgent security improvements.

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

10 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  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 oblin.at

This scan found 17 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
0
Security headers
45
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
0
Average
33

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 firm operates in the legal services sector, focusing on dispute resolution including arbitration, litigation, enforcement, and white collar crime defense. It serves an international clientele, leveraging multilingual and cross-jurisdictional expertise. The business model is service-based, relying on legal expertise and network memberships (BOKS, EALG, IR Global, etc.) to maintain market position. The firm has a small team with diverse nationalities and languages spoken, enhancing its competitive advantage. The website content and external links reinforce its credibility and professional standing. No direct revenue streams or pricing models are disclosed, typical for law firms. Growth indicators include recent publications, events, and awards. Partnerships with international legal networks support business development and reputation.

Security posture

The current security posture is weak due to the lack of HTTPS and valid SSL certificate, exposing users to potential interception and data integrity risks. While some security headers like Content Security Policy and X-Content-Type-Options are present, critical protections such as HSTS and modern TLS support are absent. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, limiting transparency. The absence of cookie consent mechanisms may pose GDPR compliance risks. No analytics or tracking scripts reduce privacy concerns but also limit user behavior insights. Overall, the site requires immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of security policies to meet industry standards and regulatory requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Upgrade server configuration to support TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols and disable legacy protocols.
  4. Implement a cookie consent banner or mechanism to comply with GDPR and inform users about cookies.
  5. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information to improve transparency and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
OBLIN Rechtsanwälte GmbH
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses TYPO3 CMS on an Apache server with a modern front-end including responsive CSS and JavaScript. The site loads multiple compressed CSS and JS assets with nonce-based Content Security Policy for script/style security. DNS records indicate professional hosting with a1.net and Microsoft Outlook mail protection for email. However, performance metrics are missing or zero, suggesting possible slow loading or measurement gaps. The lack of HTTPS is a major technical deficiency. No analytics or third-party tracking scripts are detected, which may be intentional for privacy. The site is well structured with clear navigation and semantic HTML. Opportunities exist to improve performance monitoring, accessibility features, and 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 oblin.at. 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 oblin.at.

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.