Skip to main content

Security report for pcode.at

pcode · Technology · Austria

High risk. 7 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

pcode is a small Austrian software agency specializing in the development and design of digital products, online shops, and custom software solutions. With approximately 8 years of experience, the company positions itself as a provider of human-centered digital experiences, emphasizing clean code, accessibility, and UX design. Their market presence is supported by client case studies and a professional online presence including social media channels. Technically, the website is built using modern technologies such as React, Nest.js, TypeScript, and Docker, hosted likely on AWS infrastructure, and developed with the Framer platform. However, a critical security weakness is the lack of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which significantly impacts the security posture. Other security headers are present but insufficient to compensate for the missing encryption. Privacy compliance is basic, with a privacy policy found but no cookie consent mechanism or GDPR compliance indicators. Contact information is clearly provided via phone, address, and a contact form, enhancing business credibility. Overall, the website is professionally designed and functional but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and build trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

7 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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

  2. 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

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. 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';…

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

Keep watching pcode.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
40
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
46

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 operates in the technology sector, focusing on software development, online shops, and web development services. Their business model is service-oriented, targeting businesses needing custom digital solutions. The presence of detailed case studies and a clear service portfolio indicates a mature approach to client engagement and marketing. The company leverages modern development frameworks and tools, which suggests a commitment to quality and maintainability. Their social media presence on LinkedIn and Instagram supports brand visibility and client interaction. The domain registration data aligns well with the company's claimed history and location, reinforcing legitimacy. However, the absence of certifications or formal security policies may limit appeal to highly regulated industries.

Security posture

The security posture of the website is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which exposes users to risks such as data interception and man-in-the-middle attacks. While some security headers like HSTS and X-Content-Type-Options are implemented, the lack of HTTPS is a critical vulnerability. No evidence of incident response policies, vulnerability disclosure, or security certifications was found, indicating limited formal security governance. The DNS configuration lacks DNSSEC and CAA records, which could improve domain security. The website does not implement cookie consent mechanisms, which may lead to GDPR compliance issues. Overall, the site requires immediate remediation of SSL/TLS issues and enhancement of privacy and security policies to meet modern standards.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and install a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS and secure all communications.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 and 1.3) and disable deprecated versions to improve encryption security.
  3. Implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance user privacy transparency.
  4. Publish clear security policies including incident response and vulnerability disclosure procedures.
  5. Enable DNSSEC and CAA DNS records to strengthen domain name system security and certificate issuance control.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
pcode - passion for people
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern technology stack including React, Nest.js, TypeScript, Docker, and design tools like Figma and Remix. It is built and hosted using Framer, with hosting likely on AWS infrastructure in the EU Central region. The site is mobile-optimized and has good design and navigation clarity. However, performance metrics are not available, and the SSL/TLS configuration is severely lacking, which impacts security and potentially SEO rankings. The site uses asynchronous scripts for event tracking from Framer but no major analytics or marketing tools were detected. Accessibility features appear basic, with room for improvement. Overall, the technical implementation is modern but security and privacy implementations need significant improvement.
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 pcode.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 pcode.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.