Skip to main content

Security report for prolife.nl

De christelijke zorgverzekeraar · Healthcare · Netherlands

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

De christelijke zorgverzekeraar is a Dutch health insurance provider focused on integrating Christian values with healthcare services. It operates as part of the larger Zilveren Kruis and Achmea insurance group, offering a range of basic and supplementary insurance products, including dental and mental health care. The website targets the Dutch Christian community, providing comprehensive information, online self-help resources, and customer service support. The company maintains a strong market position with positive customer ratings and active social media engagement. Technically, the website uses modern web technologies including jQuery, Vue.js, and Coveo search integrated with Sitecore CMS. The hosting is managed through Brandshelter DNS services. While the site is well-structured and mobile-optimized with good SEO and accessibility basics, it suffers from critical security shortcomings due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which severely impacts its security posture. Security headers are properly configured, and privacy policies are comprehensive and GDPR compliant, reflecting a mature privacy stance. However, the lack of HTTPS and secure SSL/TLS configuration poses significant risks to user data and trust. The site employs extensive analytics and marketing tools, indicating a high level of user tracking and data collection. Overall, the website is professional and credible from a business perspective but requires urgent security improvements to protect user data and maintain trust. Strategic recommendations include obtaining a valid SSL certificate, enabling modern TLS protocols, and enhancing security configurations to meet industry best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
0/ 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

5 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

    • High

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube

      What to do: Document all third-party data sharing in your privacy policy

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

Keep watching prolife.nl

This scan found 12 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
50
Security headers
85
Email security
50
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
0
Average
63

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 is positioned as a specialized health insurer catering to Christian values within the Dutch healthcare market. It leverages its affiliation with the large Achmea group to provide a broad portfolio of insurance products. The business model focuses on combining faith-based care with standard health insurance offerings, targeting a niche but significant demographic. Revenue streams likely include premiums from basic and supplementary insurance plans. The company demonstrates strong customer service focus and digital engagement, with multiple online services and apps. Partnerships with other insurance brands under Achmea enhance its market reach. Growth indicators include active content updates, event participation, and customer satisfaction ratings.

Security posture

The current security maturity is low due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and disabled TLS protocols, which are critical for secure communications. While security headers such as CSP, X-Frame-Options, and HSTS are present, the lack of HTTPS undermines these protections. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies are publicly available, indicating potential gaps in security governance. The site uses secure cookie flags and HttpOnly attributes, which is positive. The extensive use of third-party analytics and marketing tools requires careful privacy management, which appears to be addressed through comprehensive privacy and cookie policies. Overall, the site is vulnerable to interception and man-in-the-middle attacks until SSL/TLS is properly configured.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and deploy a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Enable TLS 1.2 or higher and disable all insecure protocols to ensure encrypted communications.
  3. Configure HSTS with includeSubDomains and preload flags to enforce HTTPS usage.
  4. Implement OCSP stapling and session resumption to improve SSL performance and security.
  5. Review and tighten Content Security Policy to reduce reliance on 'unsafe-eval' and 'unsafe-inline' directives.
  6. Publish a security policy and vulnerability disclosure program to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  7. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to ensure compliance with privacy regulations.
  8. Enhance accessibility features to improve usability for all users.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on Sitecore CMS with integration of Coveo search and uses jQuery and Vue.js for frontend interactivity. Hosting is managed via Brandshelter DNS services. The site includes responsive design elements and optimized images for various screen sizes. Performance data is unavailable, but the presence of modern frameworks and CDN usage suggests moderate to good performance. SEO is supported by proper meta tags and Open Graph data. Accessibility is basic but present. The main technical risk is the lack of SSL/TLS support, which is critical for secure web operations. The site uses multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools, indicating a mature digital marketing infrastructure but also increasing complexity and potential privacy risks.
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

Earlier scans of this domain

  1. 63/100Medium19 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with prolife.nl. 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 prolife.nl.

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.