Skip to main content

Security report for pleinpubliek.be

Other · N/a

High risk. 10 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

40/100

Risk levelHigh

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

Pleinpubliek.be is a website established since 2015, likely representing a small business or organization. The site uses WordPress CMS with a custom theme and integrates modern web technologies including YouTube Iframe API and Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. Cookie consent is managed through Cookiebot, with a default configuration denying ad and analytics storage, indicating a privacy-conscious approach. However, no explicit privacy policy or terms of service were found in the analyzed content, which is a gap in compliance and transparency. The website is accessible without any WAF or security challenge, and no blocking mechanisms were detected. Security headers and advanced security policies are not evident, suggesting room for improvement in security posture. Overall, the site presents a professional design and good SEO practices but lacks visible business contact information and formal security or privacy documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
25/ 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

10 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

    • High

      No Privacy Policy found

      GDPR requires a clear and accessible privacy policy

      What to do: Add a comprehensive privacy policy page and link to it prominently

  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 pleinpubliek.be

This scan found 30 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
60
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
25
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
  • 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 website appears to serve a niche or local audience, with no explicit business sector or detailed company information provided. The domain age of 2015 supports a stable presence. The absence of contact details and business identifiers limits the ability to assess market positioning or partnerships. The integration of YouTube and Google Analytics suggests content marketing and audience engagement strategies. The business model and revenue streams are not discernible from the content. There is no evidence of certifications or trust badges, which could enhance credibility. The site likely targets general visitors interested in the content or services offered, but specifics are not available.

Security posture

Security maturity is moderate. The site uses HTTPS (implied by external script sources using HTTPS), and cookie consent mechanisms are in place. However, there is no evidence of security headers such as CSP, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is published. The lack of visible contact channels for security issues and absence of a security.txt file indicate limited incident response readiness. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the provided content. The security score reflects these observations, suggesting improvements in security best practices and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Implement and configure security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS.
  3. Add visible contact information including emails and phone numbers for general and security-related inquiries.
  4. Create and publish a security.txt file and vulnerability disclosure policy to enhance incident response readiness.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts and libraries to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, YouTube Iframe API, Cookiebot, Google Tag Manager (gtag)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Cookie consent implemented with Cookiebot
  • Google consent mode configured to deny ad and analytics storage by default

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via gtag)
Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Cookiebot
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with no blocking or WAF challenge
  2. Cookie consent is implemented via Cookiebot with Google consent mode configured to deny ad and analytics storage by default
  3. No explicit privacy policy or terms of service found in the provided content
  4. No contact emails, phone numbers, or physical addresses found in the provided HTML content
  5. Website uses WordPress CMS with custom theme and includes YouTube API and Google Tag Manager scripts
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information found
  7. No explicit business information or certifications displayed
  8. Website content appears professional and well-structured with good SEO practices
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with a custom theme and uses modern JavaScript libraries including YouTube Iframe API and Google Tag Manager. Cookiebot is used for cookie consent management, indicating attention to privacy regulations. The site preloads fonts and uses asynchronous script loading for performance optimization. Mobile optimization appears good with responsive meta tags and adaptive CSS. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin indications. However, no advanced frameworks or platforms beyond WordPress are detected. Performance is moderate, with potential for improvement by adding security headers and optimizing resource loading further. Accessibility features are basic, with room for enhancement to meet higher standards.
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 pleinpubliek.be. 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 pleinpubliek.be.

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.