Skip to main content

Security report for pfs-security.co.uk

PFS Fire & Security · Other · United Kingdom

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in Network security, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

41/100

Risk levelHigh

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

PFS Fire & Security is a UK-based company specializing in fire prevention and security services, targeting residential and corporate clients primarily in Nottingham, Derby, and Leicester. The company offers a range of services including CCTV systems, on-site security, alarm monitoring, and fire protection. The website presents a professional image with clear contact information and client testimonials, positioning PFS as a regional leader with over a decade of experience. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using WooCommerce and Visual Composer, with standard plugins such as Revolution Slider and jQuery. The site is moderately optimized for performance and mobile responsiveness, with good SEO practices evident. However, some plugins appear outdated, and accessibility features are basic. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS but lacks important security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and HSTS, which are recommended to enhance protection. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating compliance gaps with GDPR and other privacy regulations. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to a domain naming rules error from Nominet UK, which raises some concerns about domain registration legitimacy, though the website content itself appears legitimate. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from improved security practices and privacy compliance 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

10 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Network security

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

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • 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

  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.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      SSL Certificate Expires Soon

      SSL certificate expires in 29 days

      What to do: Renew SSL certificate before expiration

      • NIS2 21(2)(h)
      • IR 2024/2690 9.2(c): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 9.2(c): Cryptography
      • NIST SC-17: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-17: Public Key Infrastructure Certificates

  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"

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

Keep watching pfs-security.co.uk

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. 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
37
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
35
Average
41

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

PFS Fire & Security operates as a small regional service provider in the fire and security sector, focusing on cost-effective solutions for homes and businesses. Their competitive advantage lies in their decade-long experience and comprehensive service offerings tailored to local markets. The business model centers on direct service provision with an emphasis on customer trust and reliability, supported by client testimonials. Revenue streams likely derive from installation, monitoring, and maintenance contracts. The company targets residential and corporate customers in specific UK regions, with no evident partnerships or subsidiaries disclosed on the website. Growth indicators include active blog content and calls for free estimates, suggesting ongoing marketing efforts.

Security posture

The current security posture is moderate but has notable gaps. HTTPS is implemented, ensuring encrypted communications. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces protection against common web attacks. No explicit vulnerability disclosure or incident response policies are published, limiting transparency and preparedness. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and related regulations, posing legal and reputational risks. The WHOIS data anomaly suggests potential domain registration issues, which should be investigated further. Overall, while no critical vulnerabilities are evident, improvements in security headers, compliance documentation, and domain registration transparency are recommended.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance web security.
  2. Publish clear privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and improve user trust.
  3. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities and maintain platform security.
  4. Investigate and resolve WHOIS domain registration issues to ensure domain legitimacy and trustworthiness.
  5. Develop and publish an incident response and vulnerability disclosure policy to improve transparency and security posture.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
PFS Fire & Security
Description
PFS Fire & Security is a fire prevention and security company providing cost-effective security solutions including CCTV systems, on-site security, alarm monitoring, and fire protection. They serve residential and corporate clients primarily in Nottingham, Derby, and Leicester regions.
Key services
Home Security, Corporate Security, CCTV Systems, On-site Security, Alarm Monitoring, Fire Protection
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WooCommerce, Visual Composer, Revolution Slider, jQuery, Bootstrap, Google Fonts
Frameworks
WooCommerce, Visual Composer
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Professional and consistent branding with clear business focus
  3. No privacy or cookie policies found, indicating compliance gaps
  4. Contact information is clearly presented with company email and phone
  5. No social media links detected
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information present
  7. Uses standard WordPress plugins and themes with some outdated versions
  8. No explicit security headers detected, which is a security improvement area
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform with WooCommerce for e-commerce capabilities and Visual Composer for page building. It uses common web technologies including jQuery, Bootstrap, and Google Fonts. The site loads with moderate performance and is mobile responsive with good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. However, some plugins are outdated, which may introduce security risks. Accessibility features are basic, and no advanced performance optimizations like caching or CDN usage are evident from the HTML. The technical stack is standard for small business websites but would benefit from modernization and security hardening.
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 pfs-security.co.uk. 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 pfs-security.co.uk.

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.