Skip to main content

Security report for ra-architect.co.uk

Robert Allerton RIBA · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in DNS health, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

55/100

Risk levelMedium

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

RA Architect, led by Robert Allerton RIBA, is a small, established architecture practice based in Felixstowe, UK, specializing in residential and commercial architectural projects. The firm emphasizes collaboration with local consulting firms and has a history dating back to 1992. Their market position is that of a trusted local architecture provider with recognized credentials such as RIBA chartered status and regional awards. The website reflects a professional business with a focus on client needs and project delivery. Technically, the website uses modern JavaScript libraries, CDN hosting, and integrates social media feeds, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. However, the absence of privacy and cookie policies and lack of security headers suggest room for improvement in compliance and security posture. The security posture is moderate with use of HTTPS and reCAPTCHA but lacks advanced security headers and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms. Overall, the website is functional and professional but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and domain registration legitimacy verification.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 100 · High
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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. DNS health

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

    • High

      Domain Expires Soon

      Domain expires in 28 days

      What to do: Renew domain registration before expiration

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

  3. 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';…

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

Keep watching ra-architect.co.uk

This scan found 27 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
57
Security headers
20
Email security
70
DNS health
45
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
55

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 business operates in the Real Estate sector, providing architectural services primarily to local developers, housing associations, and individual clients. Their business model is service-based, focusing on architectural design and project consulting. The firm has a small size and a long-standing presence since 1992, which supports credibility. Their Instagram presence and awards indicate active engagement and recognition in their field. The lack of explicit contact emails or phone numbers on the site suggests a preference for contact via web form. The website content and branding are consistent and targeted towards a professional audience seeking architectural services in the UK. There is no evidence of partnerships or subsidiaries from the data provided.

Security posture

The website uses HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA on its contact form, which are positive security practices. However, no security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options were detected, which are recommended to enhance security. The WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain registration issues, which raises concerns about domain legitimacy and could impact trust. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, limiting transparency in security management. The site does not expose sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries based on the analysis. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be significantly improved by adding security headers, privacy policies, and domain registration validation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to improve GDPR compliance and user trust.
  2. Add security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options to enhance website security.
  3. Verify and correct domain registration to ensure legitimacy and avoid WHOIS lookup failures.
  4. Establish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to improve transparency and incident response readiness.
  5. Include explicit contact information such as company email and phone number to improve business credibility and user accessibility.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Robert Allerton RIBA
Description
Small architecture practice established in 1992, operating from Felixstowe, focused on residential and commercial developments including domestic alterations, individual houses, and complex housing schemes. Collaborative practice working with local consulting firms.
Key services
Residential architecture, Commercial architecture, Project delivery consulting
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, PhotoSwipe, Google reCAPTCHA, Elfsight Instagram Feed Widget
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
65/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of Google reCAPTCHA on contact form

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Marketing tools
Elfsight Instagram Feed
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content and no blocking detected.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found on the site.
  3. Contact is only via a form; no explicit emails or phone numbers found.
  4. WHOIS data is unavailable due to domain registration error.
  5. Use of modern JavaScript libraries and CDN hosting.
  6. Instagram feed integration shows active social media presence.
  7. No explicit security headers detected in provided data.
  8. No analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond social media widget.
  9. Site content is focused on architecture services with local UK focus.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard web technologies including jQuery and PhotoSwipe for UI interactions, Google reCAPTCHA for bot protection, and Elfsight Instagram widget for social media integration. Hosting is via Amazon CloudFront CDN, which supports performance and availability. The site is mobile optimized with responsive design and uses Google Fonts for typography. However, no CMS or advanced frameworks were detected, indicating a custom or lightweight site build. Performance is moderate with some external dependencies. Accessibility features are basic, and SEO optimization is minimal but present. There is an opportunity to improve technical robustness by adding modern security headers and enhancing privacy compliance.
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 ra-architect.co.uk. 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 ra-architect.co.uk.

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.