Skip to main content

Security report for passerelle-esc.com

Concours Passerelle · Education · France

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Concours Passerelle operates as an educational admissions platform facilitating entry into prestigious French business schools for candidates holding bac+2 or higher. The website provides detailed information about admissions pathways, exam modalities, and school options, targeting prospective students seeking higher education in commerce and management. The platform leverages modern web technologies and integrates marketing and analytics tools such as Google Tag Manager. However, the technical infrastructure shows critical security weaknesses, notably the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS support, which undermines user trust and data security. Security headers are well configured but cannot compensate for the lack of proper encryption. Privacy compliance is minimal, with no cookie consent mechanism or explicit GDPR adherence visible. Overall, the site is functional and professionally designed but requires urgent security and privacy improvements to meet modern standards.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 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';…

  2. 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

    • 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

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Google Analytics, YouTube, Google Ads

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching passerelle-esc.com

This scan found 12 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
50
Security headers
80
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
25
Average
65

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 business model centers on providing a centralized admissions process for multiple Grandes Écoles de Commerce, enhancing candidate convenience and school collaboration. The platform's market position is solid within the French higher education sector, recognized by official bodies such as the Ministry of Higher Education and the Conférence des Grandes Écoles. Revenue streams likely include application fees and partnerships with the schools. The target audience is clearly defined as students with post-secondary education seeking advanced business degrees. The presence of multiple subdomains for candidate management indicates a modular service architecture. Social media engagement on Instagram and TikTok suggests active marketing towards younger demographics. The lack of visible certifications or security policies may impact institutional trustworthiness.

Security posture

The website demonstrates partial adherence to security best practices through HTTP headers that mitigate common web attacks such as XSS and clickjacking. However, the absence of a valid SSL certificate and support for modern TLS protocols is a critical vulnerability, exposing users to potential interception and data tampering. The lack of DNSSEC and CAA records further weakens domain security. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are published, indicating immature security governance. The site does not implement cookie consent mechanisms, risking non-compliance with GDPR. Overall, the security posture is weak and requires immediate remediation to protect user data and maintain regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across all site pages and subdomains.
  2. Enable and enforce modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3) and disable legacy protocols.
  3. Implement a cookie consent banner and privacy policy updates to ensure GDPR compliance.
  4. Publish a security policy and incident response contact information, including a security.txt file.
  5. Configure DNSSEC and CAA records to enhance DNS and certificate issuance security.
  6. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries to avoid vulnerabilities and improve performance.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on an Apache 2.4.41 server running on Ubuntu, serving HTML content with UTF-8 encoding. The front-end uses Bootstrap 4.3.1 for responsive design, jQuery 3.4.1 for DOM manipulation, FontAwesome for icons, and Slick Carousel for sliders. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing. The site loads external CSS and JS from reputable CDNs. Performance metrics indicate zero load time and resource count in the provided data, suggesting incomplete measurement or caching effects. Mobile optimization is good due to Bootstrap usage. Accessibility features are basic, with some ARIA labels and semantic HTML. SEO is supported by meta tags including Open Graph properties. The hosting provider is not explicitly identified but the IP address suggests a cloud or VPS environment. The lack of a CMS or framework is noted, indicating a custom or static site architecture.
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 passerelle-esc.com. 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 passerelle-esc.com.

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.