Skip to main content

Security report for pear.cz

PEAR s.r.o. · Technology · Czech Republic

High risk. 11 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Network security and 2 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

PEAR s.r.o. is a Czech software company specializing in reservation and economic systems for the travel industry, with over 25 years of experience. Their website presents a professional image targeting travel agencies, tour operators, and related sectors. The company offers a range of software products and services including reservation systems, economic systems, custom software development, training, and support. The website is built on TYPO3 CMS and uses common web technologies such as jQuery and Google Analytics. While the site is content-rich and well-structured, it lacks visible privacy and cookie policies, which is a compliance concern. The absence of WHOIS data limits domain trust verification, but the presence of ISO certifications and client references supports business credibility.

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

11 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

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • Critical

      Critical Service Exposed: MySQL

      Port 3306 (MySQL) is publicly accessible - MySQL - Database server

      What to do: Immediately restrict access to MySQL using firewall or VPN

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

  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 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 pear.cz

This scan found 28 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
80
Network security
0
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 · found on this site
  • 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 occupies a niche market in travel reservation software with a stable client base and partnerships with recognized entities like Microsoft and travel portals. Their business model focuses on software development and service provision for travel agencies and related businesses. The website content and partner logos indicate a well-established ecosystem. However, the lack of public WHOIS data and privacy policies may affect trust among privacy-conscious clients. The company appears to be small-sized but with a focused and specialized offering, leveraging long-term industry experience.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and common security practices but lacks explicit security headers and visible privacy compliance mechanisms. No forms were detected on the homepage, reducing immediate attack surface, but third-party scripts like Google Analytics and retargeting pixels are present without clear consent mechanisms. The absence of incident response contacts and vulnerability disclosure policies indicates room for improvement in security maturity. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing security headers, privacy policies, and formal incident response information.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and display comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to ensure GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to improve security posture.
  3. Publish incident response and vulnerability disclosure information to enhance transparency and trust.
  4. Improve mobile optimization and accessibility features to enhance user experience across devices.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking technologies to minimize privacy risks and comply with data protection regulations.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
PEAR s.r.o.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
PEAR s.r.o.
Description
Softwarová firma PEAR s.r.o. se již 25 let specializuje na rezervační systémy pro cestovní kanceláře, které sama vyvíjí. Dodávané rezervační systémy firmy PEAR jsou v desítkách cestovních kanceláří úspěšně implementované, provozem prověřené, odzkoušené a jsou rutinně využívány.
Key services
Reservation systems for travel agencies, Economic systems for travel companies, Custom software development, Training and support services
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
TYPO3 CMS, jQuery, Font Awesome, Google Analytics, Slick Slider, Google Maps iframe
Frameworks
TYPO3 CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS usage (implied by base href https://)
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
imedia.cz, Sklik.cz
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 rich content.
  2. No privacy or cookie policy found, which is a compliance gap.
  3. WHOIS data is unavailable, limiting domain trust verification.
  4. Website uses TYPO3 CMS and common JS libraries.
  5. Contact information is clearly presented with phone, email, and address.
  6. ISO certifications displayed as trust indicators.
  7. Multiple partner logos linked to external domains.
  8. Google Analytics and retargeting scripts present without visible cookie consent.
  9. No forms detected on the homepage content provided.
  10. No social media links found in the content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on TYPO3 CMS, a mature content management system, and uses standard JavaScript libraries like jQuery and Slick Slider for UI components. Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager are used for analytics and marketing. The site loads external CSS and JS from CDNs, which is common practice. Performance is moderate with room for improvement in mobile responsiveness and accessibility. No hosting provider information was found. The site uses HTTPS, but no detailed SSL configuration data is available. The technical stack is stable but could benefit from modernization and enhanced security configurations.
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 pear.cz. 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 pear.cz.

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.