Skip to main content

Security report for pizela.ch

Hotel/Restaurant Piz Ela · Hospitality · Switzerland

High risk. 8 critical or high findings in Network security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Hotel/Restaurant Piz Ela is a small hospitality business located in Bergün/Bravuogn, Switzerland, offering hotel accommodations and restaurant/pizzeria services. The website presents a professional and consistent brand image with clear contact information and environmental commitment messaging. The business targets tourists and visitors to the region seeking historic charm and local hospitality. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using the Bridge theme and WPBakery Page Builder, with modern libraries such as jQuery and Google reCAPTCHA integrated for form security. Performance and mobile optimization are good, though accessibility and SEO could be improved. Security posture is moderate with HTTPS enforced and reCAPTCHA implemented, but lacks explicit security headers and published security policies. Privacy compliance is basic with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism detected. Overall, the website is trustworthy and functional with room for security and compliance enhancements.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
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

8 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.

    • 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

  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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching pizela.ch

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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
75
Network security
0
GDPR outside view
53
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 · 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 business operates in the hospitality sector, focusing on hotel and restaurant services in a niche regional market. It leverages a straightforward business model catering to local tourism. The website supports business credibility with clear contact details and environmental initiatives, but lacks advanced marketing or analytics tools. No partnerships or subsidiaries are evident beyond local event links and the website creator. Growth potential may be tied to regional tourism trends. The absence of detailed business registration or certifications on the site limits deeper business intelligence insights.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic to moderate security posture. HTTPS is properly configured, and Google reCAPTCHA v3 is used to protect forms from spam and abuse. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS reduces defense in depth. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is published, which may hinder timely security issue reporting. The site does not expose sensitive data or show signs of vulnerabilities in the analyzed content. Overall, security practices are adequate for a small hospitality site but could be improved to align with best practices and compliance requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Strict-Transport-Security to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  2. Add a cookie policy and consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
  3. Publish clear security and incident response policies to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Regularly update WordPress core, themes, and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance SEO and accessibility features to improve user experience and search engine ranking.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Hotel/Restaurant Piz Ela
Description
Hotel and restaurant with historic charm located in Bergün/Bravuogn, Switzerland. Offers hotel accommodations, restaurant and pizzeria services, and promotes CO2-neutral heating and environmental awareness.
Key services
Hotel accommodations, Restaurant and pizzeria dining
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, WPBakery Page Builder, jQuery, MediaElement.js, Google reCAPTCHA
Frameworks
Bridge WordPress Theme
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Google reCAPTCHA v3 implemented on forms

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Google reCAPTCHA
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a professionally designed WordPress site for a small hospitality business in Switzerland.
  2. Clear contact information and business address provided.
  3. No privacy or cookie consent banners detected, which may be a compliance gap.
  4. No explicit security policies or incident response information published.
  5. Use of Google reCAPTCHA indicates some security awareness.
  6. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
  7. No advertising or affiliate marketing detected beyond basic tracking.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using the Bridge theme and WPBakery Page Builder, indicating a modern but standard infrastructure. It uses jQuery and MediaElement.js for interactive and media content, and integrates Google reCAPTCHA v3 for form security. The site loads external resources from Google Fonts and Google reCAPTCHA domains. Performance is moderate with some large media elements (video background) that may impact load times. Mobile optimization is good, but accessibility features are basic. No advanced analytics or marketing tools are detected, suggesting limited technical complexity. The site would benefit from performance optimization and enhanced accessibility compliance.
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 pizela.ch. 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 pizela.ch.

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.