Skip to main content

Security report for ogilvie.co.uk

Ogilvie Group · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Ogilvie Group is a well-established family-owned business founded in 1946, operating multiple divisions including construction, fleet management, home building, surveying, and IT security solutions. The company holds a strong market position in Scotland as one of the largest privately owned construction firms and has diversified into complementary sectors. Their website reflects a professional and consistent brand image targeting business clients and partners across these industries. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using modern plugins and frameworks, with good mobile optimization and SEO practices. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and no visible vulnerabilities, though there is room for improvement in security headers and published policies. The absence of WHOIS data due to domain naming query issues slightly impacts domain trust but does not detract from the overall legitimacy of the business. Strategic recommendations include enhancing privacy compliance, publishing security policies, and improving domain registration transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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. 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

  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. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching ogilvie.co.uk

This scan found 24 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
87
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
61

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 Ogilvie Group operates a diversified business model with multiple subsidiaries serving construction, fleet leasing, home building, surveying, and IT security markets. Their competitive advantage lies in their long history, scale, and breadth of services. The company targets corporate clients and partners in the UK and Europe, leveraging a family-owned reputation for trust and integrity. Growth indicators include a 20% growth target, 600 colleagues, and 8 locations. The group maintains a strong digital presence with social media and a professionally designed website. Revenue streams likely derive from construction contracts, fleet leasing, property sales, surveying services, and IT security solutions. The company’s partnership ecosystem includes its subsidiaries but no external partners were identified from the website data.

Security posture

Ogilvie Group demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enforced and secure form handling. No sensitive data leakage or vulnerable libraries were detected. However, the website lacks explicit security policies, incident response information, and cookie consent mechanisms, which are important for GDPR compliance and user trust. The absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options is a gap. No DNSSEC information is available. Overall, the security maturity is moderate to good but could be enhanced by formalizing policies and improving technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options to mitigate common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner and detailed cookie policy to comply with GDPR and enhance privacy transparency.
  3. Publish explicit security and incident response policies on the website to improve trust and compliance.
  4. Verify and publish accurate WHOIS domain registration data to improve domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and plugins for vulnerabilities and update them promptly.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Ogilvie Group
VAT number
GB400 892 864
Registration number
SC029219
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Ogilvie Group
Description
A family owned business supporting numerous industries including construction, home-building, vehicle management, IT and surveying.
Key services
Construction, Fleet management and leasing, Home building, Surveying services, IT infrastructure and security solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, PHP, jQuery, Google Analytics, Flickity carousel, Yoast SEO plugin, Contact Form 7, SuperPWA (Progressive Web App), Genesis Blocks
Frameworks
WPBakery Page Builder
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure contact forms

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Umami Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Umami Analytics
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Professional business website for a large diversified group
  3. No explicit privacy or cookie consent banners found
  4. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain naming error in query
  5. Multiple divisions and subsidiaries clearly presented
  6. Use of modern WordPress plugins and SEO best practices
  7. No exposed sensitive data or obvious security issues in HTML
  8. Contact information includes physical address and contact form
  9. Social media presence on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn
  10. No explicit security or incident response policies published
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with the Salient theme and uses WPBakery Page Builder for layout. It employs modern JavaScript libraries such as jQuery, Flickity for carousels, and Google Analytics for tracking. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and uses a Progressive Web App plugin for enhanced user experience. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data in JSON-LD format. Performance is moderate with some heavy images but generally good. Accessibility is basic with some screen reader text and skip links. Hosting provider details are not explicitly found. Overall, the technical infrastructure is modern and well-maintained but could benefit from performance optimization and enhanced accessibility features.
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 ogilvie.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 ogilvie.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.