Skip to main content

Security report for pauljochum.com

Paul Jochum · Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Paul Jochum's website serves as a professional portfolio showcasing his expertise in designing and developing visual identities for brands, institutions, and cultural projects. The site emphasizes a blend of graphic design, web design, and development to deliver cohesive branding systems with a focus on clarity and narrative. The business operates as a small-scale creative professional targeting niche clients in the cultural and institutional sectors. Technically, the website is built using the Framer platform, leveraging modern JavaScript and SVG technologies, with moderate performance and good mobile optimization. However, the site lacks advanced accessibility features and comprehensive SEO optimizations. Security posture is weak due to missing HTTPS verification, absence of security headers, and no visible privacy or cookie policies, which poses compliance and trust challenges. The WHOIS data is unavailable, raising concerns about domain registration legitimacy, although the website content appears professional and consistent. Overall, the site is functional and visually appealing but requires improvements in security, privacy compliance, and domain transparency to enhance trust and reduce risk.

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. 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 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';…

  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

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

Keep watching pauljochum.com

This scan found 23 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
52
Security headers
40
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention pauljochum.com, from OffSeq Breach.

No leaked records found

Breach holds no records for pauljochum.com right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.

Monitor on Breach (opens in a new tab)

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 is positioned as a specialized design and development service provider focusing on visual identity creation for cultural and institutional clients. The business model revolves around bespoke creative services delivered from concept to completion. The website indicates a small business size with no parent or subsidiary affiliations. Social media presence on LinkedIn and Instagram supports professional networking and marketing. The absence of detailed business registration or certification information limits deeper business intelligence. The site’s content quality and branding consistency suggest a credible market presence within its niche. Growth potential may depend on enhancing digital trust signals and expanding compliance transparency.

Security posture

The website currently exhibits a low security maturity level. Key vulnerabilities include lack of HTTPS confirmation, missing security headers (such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options), and absence of privacy and cookie policies, which are critical for GDPR compliance. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are present, limiting the ability to handle security events effectively. The use of third-party scripts from Framer is noted but without explicit security audits. The missing WHOIS data further reduces trustworthiness and may indicate privacy protection or recent domain registration. These factors collectively increase the risk profile and may impact user trust and regulatory compliance.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate and verify configuration.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements.
  3. Deploy security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy and provide security contact information.
  5. Obtain and publish transparent domain registration information or clarify privacy protection.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Paul Jochum
Description
Paul Jochum designs and develops visual identities for brands, institutions, and cultural projects. His work merges graphic design, web design, and development into cohesive systems — from concept to completion — with a focus on clarity, precision, and narrative.
Key services
visual identity design, graphic design, web design, development
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Framer, JavaScript, SVG
Frameworks
Framer
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Analytics and tracking

Services
framer.com events
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
framer.com events script
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a portfolio site for a design professional named Paul Jochum.
  2. No WHOIS data available, domain may be unregistered or WHOIS is restricted.
  3. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  4. Contact email is present in footer: mail@pauljochum.com
  5. Social media links to LinkedIn and Instagram are present.
  6. No phone numbers or physical addresses found.
  7. Site uses Framer platform and related scripts.
  8. No security headers or advanced security policies detected.
  9. No forms detected on the main page.
  10. No structured data (JSON-LD) found in the HTML.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Framer platform, utilizing modern JavaScript modules and SVG graphics for visual elements. The site demonstrates good mobile responsiveness and a clean, professional design. However, accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimizations are minimal, with meta tags present but no structured data like JSON-LD. Performance is moderate, with asynchronous loading of scripts and module preloading. No CMS or hosting provider information is explicitly detected. The technical stack is modern but could benefit from enhanced accessibility and SEO practices, as well as improved security configurations to mitigate risks.
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 pauljochum.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 pauljochum.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.