Skip to main content

Security report for precision-engineers.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

69/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The domain www.precision-engineers.com/lander is currently unregistered or parked, as indicated by the WHOIS lookup failure and the minimal placeholder website content. The website only contains a basic parking page with no business-related content, metadata, or contact information. There is no evidence of an active business presence or digital infrastructure beyond basic React scripts used for the parking page. Technically, the site uses minimal JavaScript and CSS resources loaded from a third-party parking service domain (wsimg.com). There is no CMS detected, no SEO metadata, and no security headers or HTTPS information available. The site is not optimized for mobile or accessibility beyond basic viewport settings. From a security perspective, the absence of HTTPS, security headers, and any business or contact data indicates a very low security posture. The domain is not registered, which raises legitimacy concerns. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies are present, and no forms or data collection mechanisms exist. Overall, this domain and website do not represent an active or legitimate business entity at this time. The risk is high for anyone expecting a functional or secure website. Strategic recommendations include registering the domain properly, deploying a secure website with HTTPS, adding business and compliance information, and implementing security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
50/ 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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';…

  2. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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

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

Keep watching precision-engineers.com

This scan found 19 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
85
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
69

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

No business intelligence can be derived from the current website or WHOIS data as the domain is unregistered or parked. There is no company name, market positioning, services, or operational data available. The domain appears unused and does not represent an active business or market participant.

Security posture

The security posture is extremely weak due to the lack of HTTPS, absence of security headers, no visible compliance policies, and no incident response or contact information. The domain is unregistered, which itself is a major trust and legitimacy issue. There are no indications of vulnerability scanning or mitigation, and no security culture is evident.

Recommendations

  1. Register the domain with a reputable registrar to establish ownership and legitimacy.
  2. Deploy a secure website with HTTPS and valid SSL certificates to protect visitors.
  3. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Add comprehensive privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies to comply with regulations.
  5. Include clear business contact information and incident response channels to build trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is minimal with only parking placeholder HTML and scripts indicating a parking or placeholder page. No actual business content found. WHOIS lookup shows no domain registration. Likely domain is unregistered or parked. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, React
Frameworks
PW (likely Parking Web framework)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

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 a parking/placeholder page with no meaningful content
  2. No WHOIS registration data found for the domain
  3. No contact information, policies, or business data present
  4. No security headers or HTTPS information available
  5. Minimal technical implementation with basic React and parking scripts
  6. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond parking scripts
  7. No external business or partner links except hosting image domain
  8. No forms or data collection elements present
Technical notes

Notes

The website is a minimal parking page built with React and served with static CSS and JS from a third-party parking service domain. There is no CMS or backend detected. Performance is moderate due to minimal content but lacks optimization for SEO and accessibility. The technical debt is high as the site lacks any real content or business functionality. Modernization would require full site development and deployment on a secure hosting platform.
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 precision-engineers.com. 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 precision-engineers.com.

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.