Skip to main content

Security report for prorail.nl

ProRail · Transportation · Netherlands

Low risk. No critical or high findings.

Security score

89/100

Risk levelLow

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

ProRail is the Dutch government agency responsible for managing and maintaining the national railway infrastructure. The website clearly communicates its mission to ensure safe, timely, and sustainable rail transport for passengers and freight. The site targets a broad audience including travelers, freight operators, and government stakeholders. Technically, the site uses modern web technologies including JavaScript modules, consent management via Cookiebot, push notifications with OneSignal, and analytics tools such as Google Analytics and Hotjar. The site is hosted securely with HTTPS and employs multiple security headers, reflecting a mature security posture. However, explicit security policies and incident response contacts are not publicly available, representing an area for improvement. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and compliant with GDPR regulations, with a strong alignment between domain registration data and business identity.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
88/ 100 · Low
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

No critical or high findings. These medium findings are worth fixing next.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • Medium

      Privacy policy may not be GDPR compliant

      Privacy policy lacks explicit GDPR compliance elements

      What to do: Update privacy policy to explicitly address GDPR requirements and user rights

  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.

    • Medium

      No MTA-STS Policy

      MTA-STS enforces TLS for email delivery

      What to do: Implement MTA-STS to prevent downgrade attacks

  3. DNS health

    DNS sends visitors and email to the right servers. Misconfigured records can cause outages or let someone redirect your traffic.

    • Medium

      DNSSEC Not Enabled

      DNSSEC is not configured for this domain

      What to do: Enable DNSSEC to prevent DNS spoofing attacks

      • CAPEC-142
      • RFC 4033
      • RFC 4035
    • Medium

      Domain Transfer Lock Not Enabled

      Domain can be transferred without authorization

      What to do: Enable domain transfer lock for security

Keep watching prorail.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
100
Security headers
90
Email security
80
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
88
Average
89

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

Breach exposure

Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.

Dark web exposure

Add-on

Leaked records that mention prorail.nl, from OffSeq Breach.

Total records
268
Employees
45
Customers
168
Third parties
55
Weak passwords
16%

Latest record dated 2026-05-28 · 16 subdomains affected

See the 10 newest leaked credentials

A one-off add-on to this report that lists the most recent identifier and password pairs OffSeq Breach holds for prorail.nl.

Select it in the checkout above.

Masked preview

  • –sts.prorail.nl2026-05-28
  • –sts.prorail.nl2026-05-28
  • –sts.prorail.nl2026-05-27
  • –sts.prorail.nl2026-05-27
  • –sts.prorail.nl2026-05-17

Breach keeps ingesting new leaks, so these numbers can grow between scans.

Open in Breach(opens in a new tab)Monitor on Breach(opens in a new tab)

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

ProRail holds a dominant position as the national railway infrastructure manager in the Netherlands, operating under government oversight. Its business model focuses on infrastructure management rather than direct transport services. The website supports this by providing detailed information on services, infrastructure projects, and stakeholder engagement. The presence of multiple subdomains for specialized services indicates a well-structured digital ecosystem. The use of advanced consent management and analytics tools suggests a data-driven approach to user experience and compliance. Partnerships with platforms like LinkedIn and Facebook for marketing and communication further enhance its outreach. The company’s large size and government affiliation contribute to its credibility and operational stability.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a strong security posture with enforced HTTPS, comprehensive security headers, and a robust cookie consent mechanism that blocks scripts until consent is given. The use of OneSignal for push notifications is privacy-aware, requiring explicit user consent. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the analysis. However, the absence of a publicly available security policy or vulnerability disclosure program limits transparency. Incident response contact information is also not clearly provided, which could hinder timely reporting and mitigation of security incidents. Overall, the security maturity is high but could benefit from enhanced transparency and formalized disclosure policies.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and commitments.
  2. Provide clear incident response and abuse contact channels on the website.
  3. Implement and publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Regularly review and audit third-party scripts and libraries for security vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing contact details for the Data Protection Officer.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
ProRail
Registration number
30286738
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
ProRail
Description
ProRail is verantwoordelijk voor het spoorwegnet van Nederland. Samen met vervoerders zetten wij ons in om reizigers en goederen veilig en op tijd op hun bestemming te laten komen. We willen meer treinen laten rijden, op een veilige manier en met minder hinder.
Key services
Railway infrastructure management, Maintenance and development of railway network, Coordination with transport operators
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, CSS, HTML5, OneSignal (push notifications), Google Tag Manager, Cookiebot (consent management), ReadSpeaker (text-to-speech)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
90/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent with blocking mode
  • Use of security headers
  • No exposed sensitive data detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Hotjar
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
LinkedIn Ads
Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Marketing tools
OneSignal, Cookiebot
Transparency
good

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses modern consent management with Cookiebot.
  2. Push notifications implemented with OneSignal requiring user consent.
  3. Multiple third-party analytics and marketing tools are used with consent.
  4. No signs of phishing, malware, or suspicious content.
  5. Clear branding and consistent messaging throughout the site.
  6. Good use of security headers and HTTPS.
  7. No explicit security or incident response policies published publicly.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web standards with modular JavaScript and CSS. It leverages a CMS likely to be Episerver, indicated by cookie names. Performance is moderate with preloading of critical scripts and images. Accessibility and mobile optimization are good, supported by ARIA roles and responsive design. The integration of multiple third-party services is managed with user consent, reflecting good privacy practices. Hosting details are not explicit but the use of CDN and security headers suggests a professional hosting environment. Opportunities exist to improve performance further and to document technical architecture for transparency.
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. 88/100Low22 findingsView report
Reviews of this site

Share your experience with prorail.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 prorail.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.