Skip to main content

Security report for pif.co.uk

Pinnacle Freight · Transportation · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Pinnacle Freight is a well-established international freight forwarding company with nearly 50 years of experience, operating primarily in the UK and US markets. They offer a comprehensive range of logistics services including air, sea, and road freight, warehousing, export packing, and specialist freight solutions such as dangerous goods and aerospace logistics. Their market position is strong, supported by multiple industry certifications and a professional online presence. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Elementor, optimized for SEO and mobile use, and integrates modern analytics and tracking tools. Security posture is good with HTTPS and domain transfer protections, though DNSSEC is not enabled and no explicit security policy or incident response information is published. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant, reflecting a mature approach to data protection. Overall, the website and business demonstrate high professionalism, trustworthiness, and digital maturity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
80/ 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

5 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.

    • Critical

      Unable to retrieve SSL certificate

      Could not establish secure connection to retrieve certificate information

      What to do: Check if the server is accessible and SSL/TLS is properly configured

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • 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

  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 pif.co.uk

This scan found 21 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
15
Email security
80
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
80
Average
59

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 targets businesses requiring reliable international freight and logistics services, leveraging nearly five decades of industry experience and a strong transatlantic presence. Their business model focuses on end-to-end freight solutions with value-added services like export packing and ecommerce fulfillment. The presence of multiple certifications and client testimonials enhances their competitive advantage. Their digital ecosystem includes integration with client IT systems for supply chain visibility, indicating a forward-looking approach. The company maintains a medium size with offices and warehouses in strategic locations, supporting global trade lanes and specialized freight sectors such as pharmaceuticals and aerospace.

Security posture

Pinnacle Freight's website employs HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate and uses Cloudflare DNS servers, providing a solid foundation for secure communications. The domain status clientTransferProhibited prevents unauthorized transfers, enhancing domain security. However, DNSSEC is not enabled, which could be improved to protect against DNS spoofing. No explicit security policy or incident response contacts are published, which is a gap in transparency and preparedness. The website does not expose sensitive data and uses asynchronous loading for analytics scripts, reducing performance impact. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from enhanced DNS security and published security policies.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing attacks.
  2. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and incident response procedures.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.
  4. Review and explicitly configure security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Content-Type-Options.
  5. Continue investing in privacy compliance and transparency to maintain GDPR adherence and user trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Pinnacle International Freight Limited
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Pinnacle Freight
Description
UK & US based Freight forwarder providing international freight shipping, covering all modes of transport. First-class service for global freight solutions.
Key services
Air Freight, Sea Freight, Warehousing, Export Packing, Transatlantic Shipping, Dangerous Goods Freight, Defence & Aerospace Freight, Pharmaceutical Logistics, Space Tech Logistics, Retail Display Logistics
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, Yoast SEO, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity, Cloudflare DNS
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and analytics scripts asynchronously

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Microsoft Clarity
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Microsoft Clarity
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Strong presence of industry certifications and trust signals.
  3. Comprehensive service offerings with detailed case studies and client testimonials.
  4. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices.
  5. No signs of malicious or suspicious content.
  6. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant.
  7. No explicit security policy or incident response information found.
  8. No vulnerability disclosure or security.txt detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using Elementor for page building and Yoast SEO for optimization. It integrates Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, and Microsoft Clarity for analytics and user behavior tracking. The site is mobile responsive with good accessibility features and clear navigation. Performance is moderate, likely due to rich media content and multiple scripts, but overall user experience is smooth. Hosting details are not explicit, but DNS is managed via Cloudflare, which may provide CDN and security benefits. The site uses caching and minification plugins to optimize CSS and JS delivery. There is room for improvement in DNS security and explicit security header 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 pif.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 pif.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.