Skip to main content

Security report for plg.dk

Other · Denmark

Partial score · DNS & email only

52/100

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

The website plg.dk currently presents a minimal placeholder page indicating it is under development, with no substantive content, contact information, or policies available. The domain is registered since 2012 and appears legitimate based on WHOIS data, but the lack of website content and security features limits its digital maturity and trustworthiness. Technically, the site uses outdated jQuery and jQuery UI libraries without visible modern frameworks or CMS, and no security headers or HTTPS status could be confirmed from the data provided. Security posture is weak due to absence of HTTPS, security policies, and contact channels for incident response. Overall, the site scores low on content quality, technical implementation, security, privacy compliance, and business credibility, indicating a need for significant development and security improvements before it can be considered a professional and trustworthy online presence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
15/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
6of 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

6 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

    • 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

    • 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

  2. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

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

Keep watching plg.dk

This scan found 17 issues across 5 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
72
Email security
65
DNS health
70
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
15
Average
52

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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

Due to the lack of content and business information on the website, detailed business intelligence is limited. The domain age suggests an established entity likely based in Denmark, but no clear business model, services, or market positioning can be derived from the site. No partnerships, certifications, or trust indicators are present. The site appears to be in early stages of deployment or redevelopment, with no visible revenue streams or customer engagement mechanisms.

Security posture

The current security posture is poor. The absence of HTTPS and security headers exposes the site to risks such as data interception and clickjacking. No privacy or cookie policies are present, indicating non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available, limiting the organization's ability to manage security incidents effectively. The use of outdated JavaScript libraries may introduce vulnerabilities. Overall, the site requires urgent security enhancements to protect users and comply with regulations.

Recommendations

  1. Implement HTTPS with a valid SSL/TLS certificate to secure all communications.
  2. Add comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  3. Publish clear contact information including support and security incident channels.
  4. Update JavaScript libraries to current versions and implement security headers.
  5. Develop substantive website content to improve user trust and business credibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
jQuery, jQuery UI
Performance
moderate
Mobile
poor
Accessibility
poor
SEO
poor

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. Website is under development with minimal content.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact information or forms present.
  4. Uses outdated jQuery and jQuery UI libraries.
  5. No security headers or HTTPS information available.
  6. WHOIS data indicates a stable and legitimate domain registration.
  7. No external links or social media profiles detected.
  8. No analytics or advertising technologies detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic jQuery and jQuery UI libraries loaded from local paths, indicating a simple or legacy technical stack. No CMS or modern frameworks are detected. The site lacks meta tags, SEO optimization, and accessibility features. Performance is likely moderate given minimal content but mobile optimization and accessibility are poor. Hosting provider and SSL configuration details are not available. The site is currently a placeholder with no interactive forms or external links, limiting technical complexity but also functionality.
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 plg.dk. 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 plg.dk.

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.