Skip to main content

Security report for phtm.co.uk

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS and Security headers.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
83/ 100 · Low
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

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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

  2. 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 phtm.co.uk

This scan found 27 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
47
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
83
Average
63

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 holds a strong position as a niche media publisher serving the UK taxi and private hire sector. Its competitive advantage lies in its official association affiliation and event organization capabilities. Revenue streams likely include advertising, event sponsorship, and subscription services. The target customers are industry professionals, operators, and suppliers. The partnership ecosystem includes insurance providers, taxi technology companies, and legal services. Growth indicators include regular event hosting and digital edition availability. The company demonstrates a focused business model with clear market segmentation and established industry relationships.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a moderate security maturity level with HTTPS enforcement and use of reCAPTCHA to protect forms. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options reduces its defense-in-depth. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is provided, indicating gaps in security transparency and readiness. Data protection practices appear basic with cookie consent implemented but no detailed privacy or security framework references. The WHOIS domain registration anomaly is a notable risk factor requiring investigation. Overall, the security posture is adequate but could be significantly improved with enhanced policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection.
  2. Publish explicit security and incident response policies on the website to improve transparency and readiness.
  3. Investigate and resolve domain registration issues to ensure WHOIS data accuracy and legitimacy.
  4. Conduct regular third-party script audits to mitigate risks from external libraries and tracking tools.
  5. Enhance privacy compliance by detailing data retention policies and providing clear user data rights information.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Private Hire and Taxi Monthly Limited
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Private Hire and Taxi Monthly Limited
Description
Official newspaper of the National Private Hire Association providing news, tables, trade index, and event information for the private hire and taxi industry.
Key services
News publication, Digital newspaper editions, Industry event organization (PHTM Expo), Advertising platform
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Google Tag Manager, Facebook SDK, Google reCAPTCHA, jQuery (implied by $j usage), Google Fonts (Montserrat)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on forms
  • Cookie consent banner implemented

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via Google Tag Manager)
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook SDK
Marketing tools
Facebook SDK
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 and no blocking detected.
  2. No WHOIS data available due to domain naming error from registry.
  3. Privacy and cookie policies are present and implemented.
  4. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  5. Multiple external trusted domains linked, mostly industry partners and advertisers.
  6. Use of modern tracking and marketing tools including Google Tag Manager and Facebook SDK.
  7. No forms detected in the provided HTML content; subscription and registration links lead to other pages.
  8. Physical address and phone number clearly displayed in footer.
  9. Social media presence on Facebook, LinkedIn, X (Twitter), WhatsApp.
  10. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
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 phtm.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 phtm.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.