Skip to main content

Security report for oegho.at

Other · Austria

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

49/100

Risk levelHigh

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

The website www.oegho.at represents a professional organization likely related to the medical or scientific community in Austria, as indicated by the site title 'OeGHO' and the use of TYPO3 CMS. The site uses modern frontend technologies such as Bootstrap 4.3.1 and is structured with responsive design principles, providing a good user experience and navigation clarity. However, the lack of visible privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies indicates incomplete compliance with modern privacy standards. The absence of contact information and security headers suggests room for improvement in transparency and security posture. WHOIS data could not be retrieved due to quota limits on the NIC.AT WHOIS server, limiting the ability to fully verify domain legitimacy. Overall, the site appears legitimate and safe but would benefit from enhanced privacy and security measures.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

5 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  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';…

  3. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching oegho.at

This scan found 18 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
30
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
83
Average
49

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 organization behind www.oegho.at appears to be a small-sized entity operating in Austria, likely a medical or scientific society given the domain and site title. The business model seems focused on providing information and resources to a specialized audience, possibly healthcare professionals or researchers. The site does not display commercial activities, advertising, or extensive tracking, indicating a non-profit or professional association model. The lack of detailed business information and contact data limits deeper business intelligence insights. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident from the site content.

Security posture

The website currently exhibits a basic security posture. HTTPS is assumed but not explicitly confirmed in the provided data. No security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, or X-Content-Type-Options were detected, which are recommended best practices. No forms or input fields were found, reducing attack surface but also limiting user interaction. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates potential compliance gaps with GDPR and related regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is present, which could impact trust and readiness for security incidents. Overall, the site is functional but would benefit from implementing standard security headers, privacy policies, and incident response contacts.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Ensure HTTPS is enforced site-wide with a strong SSL/TLS configuration.
  4. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for business and security incident reporting.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to demonstrate security maturity and transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Bootstrap 4.3.1, TYPO3 CMS
Frameworks
TYPO3 CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
50/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses TYPO3 CMS with Bootstrap 4.3.1 for frontend styling.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to quota exceeded on NIC.AT WHOIS server.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided HTML content.
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or social media links detected in the provided content.
  5. No security headers or explicit security policies detected in the HTML content.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected in the provided HTML content.
  7. Website content appears professional and related to a medical or scientific society (OeGHO).
  8. No signs of adult or questionable content detected.
  9. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  10. No external links or domains detected in the provided HTML snippet.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on TYPO3 CMS, a robust and widely used content management system, combined with Bootstrap 4.3.1 for responsive design and styling. The site appears to have a moderate performance profile with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. SEO optimization is basic with standard meta tags but no advanced structured data or Open Graph tags detected. No analytics or tracking scripts were found, indicating minimal user tracking. The lack of visible external links or social media integrations suggests a focused content approach. Technical debt appears low but the absence of security headers and privacy compliance features indicates areas for modernization and risk reduction.
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 oegho.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 oegho.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.