Skip to main content

Security report for orgo.ee

ORGO OÜ · Other · Estonia

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

ORGO OÜ is a small Estonian company with a minimal web presence focused primarily on providing contact information. The website lacks detailed business descriptions, service offerings, or marketing content, indicating a basic digital footprint. The domain is registered with Elkdata OÜ since 2017, consistent with the company's Estonian origin and contact details. Technically, the website uses standard HTML5 and CSS3 with Google Fonts integration but lacks advanced frameworks or CMS platforms. Performance and mobile optimization are basic but functional. Security posture is weak due to absence of security headers, privacy policies, and visible HTTPS enforcement, although no critical vulnerabilities were detected. Overall, the site is legitimate but underdeveloped in terms of content, security, and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
10/ 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

    • 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

  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';…

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

Keep watching orgo.ee

This scan found 30 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
15
Email security
55
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
10
Average
40

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 company appears to operate in an unspecified sector, with no explicit business model or market positioning discernible from the website. The lack of service descriptions or client engagement tools suggests a limited or niche operation. Contact details are clearly provided, supporting direct communication. The domain age and registration data support legitimacy but do not indicate significant market presence or growth. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident. The business likely targets local or regional clients in Estonia.

Security posture

Security maturity is low, with no evidence of implemented security policies, incident response contacts, or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. The absence of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR best practices. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement details were found, which could expose users to risks. The minimal website surface reduces attack vectors but also limits trust signals. Incident response readiness and data protection officer information are missing, suggesting gaps in security governance.

Recommendations

  1. Publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to enhance GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and enforce secure connections site-wide.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve security posture.
  4. Introduce a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting.
  5. Enhance website content with clear business descriptions, services, and trust indicators to improve credibility and user engagement.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ORGO OÜ
Description
The website represents ORGO OÜ, a company registered in Estonia. The site provides minimal information, primarily contact details, without explicit description of business activities or services.
Content quality
basic
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, Google Fonts (Poppins)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
40/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is minimalistic with only basic contact information and branding.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No forms or data collection mechanisms present.
  4. No social media or external business-related links found except Google Fonts.
  5. No security headers or advanced security practices detected.
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected.
  7. Domain registration is consistent and legitimate.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built with basic HTML and CSS, utilizing Google Fonts for typography. No CMS or JavaScript frameworks are detected, indicating a static site. Hosting and DNS are managed by Elkdata OÜ, consistent with the domain registrar. Performance is moderate with no evident optimization or advanced caching. Mobile responsiveness is basic but functional. SEO is minimal due to lack of meta descriptions, Open Graph tags, or structured data. The site lacks analytics or tracking scripts, limiting insights into user behavior. Technical debt appears low but modernization opportunities exist to improve security, SEO, and user experience.
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 orgo.ee. 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 orgo.ee.

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.