Skip to main content

Security report for qlot.com

Other · N/a

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

Security score

73/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Qlot.com appears to be a website built on WordPress using the Divi theme, with a domain registered since 1998, indicating a long-standing presence. The website content is minimal and lacks visible business descriptions, contact information, or legal policies such as privacy or terms of service. The technical infrastructure includes modern web fonts, cookie consent via CookieYes, and HTTPS enabled, but lacks advanced security headers and DNSSEC. No forms or social media links were detected in the provided content. The security posture is moderate with room for improvement in headers and policy disclosures. Overall, the site presents a basic digital footprint with limited business transparency and privacy compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
65/ 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

5 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

      Third-party services without privacy policy

      Detected services: LinkedIn, Cloudflare, Google APIs

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

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

Keep watching qlot.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
95
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
65
Average
73

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

Due to the lack of explicit business information, the market positioning and business model of Qlot.com cannot be confidently determined. The domain age suggests an established entity, but the absence of contact details and policies limits trust and credibility. The site likely targets a general audience but does not clearly communicate its services or sector. No partnerships or certifications are evident. The business intelligence is limited by the sparse content and lack of structured data.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and implements a cookie consent mechanism, which are positive security and privacy practices. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the overall security posture. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which is a gap in security transparency. The domain registration is stable and protected against unauthorized changes, but DNSSEC is not enabled. Overall, the security maturity is basic with recommendations to enhance headers, publish policies, and enable DNSSEC.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve legal compliance and user trust.
  2. Add clear contact information including email and phone numbers to facilitate communication and support.
  3. Implement security headers (CSP, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to strengthen web security.
  4. Enable DNSSEC to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain security.
  5. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy and incident response contact to enhance security transparency.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Divi Theme, jQuery, Google Fonts, CookieYes
Frameworks
WordPress
Platforms
Web
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Cookie consent mechanism present

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
CookieYes
Marketing tools
CookieYes
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website uses WordPress with Divi theme and loads external fonts and scripts from reputable sources.
  2. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented via CookieYes.
  3. No visible privacy policy, terms of service, or contact information on the homepage HTML content.
  4. No security headers detected in the provided data; SSL is enabled and presumably valid.
  5. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet; no email addresses or phone numbers found.
  6. No social media links explicitly found in the HTML content provided.
  7. Website content is minimal with a generic title and no descriptive text content visible in the truncated HTML.
  8. No structured data (JSON-LD or Open Graph) found in the provided HTML snippet.
  9. No evidence of vulnerability disclosure or security incident response information.
  10. No certifications or trust badges visible in the HTML content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with the Divi theme, using jQuery and Google Fonts. Cookie consent is managed by CookieYes. The site loads resources from reputable CDNs and domains. Performance appears moderate with standard modern web technologies. Mobile optimization is good due to responsive design inherent in Divi. Accessibility and SEO optimizations are basic, with no advanced structured data or meta tags detected. Hosting provider details are not explicit but DNS points to loopiagroup.com. The site would benefit from improved technical SEO, accessibility features, and enhanced security configurations.
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 qlot.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 qlot.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.