Skip to main content

Security report for rapidgrid.co.uk

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website www.rapidgrid.co.uk appears to be inaccessible or blocked, with its content replaced by an iframe redirecting to an unrelated external domain. The WHOIS lookup for the domain failed due to the domain being invalid per Nominet UK naming rules, indicating potential misconfiguration or misuse. No business information, contact details, or privacy policies are present on the site. The only notable feature is the presence of a cookie consent mechanism provided by ConsentManager. The technical infrastructure is minimal, lacking visible security headers or SSL configuration data. The overall security posture is weak, with potential risks from third-party iframe content. Given these factors, the website's legitimacy and trustworthiness are very low, and it is likely under a WAF or content blocking mechanism.

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

7 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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 SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 384-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  2. 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';…

  3. 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

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

Keep watching rapidgrid.co.uk

This scan found 25 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. See sample alerts.

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
60
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
59

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 absence of accessible content and lack of WHOIS data, no meaningful business intelligence can be derived. There is no visible company name, description, or sector information. The domain's invalid status and minimal content suggest the site is either inactive, misconfigured, or potentially fraudulent. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identifiable.

Security posture

The security posture is poor. The site lacks visible security headers and SSL configuration details. The presence of an iframe redirecting to a suspicious external domain raises concerns about potential malicious content or phishing risks. No incident response or security policies are found. The cookie consent mechanism is present but insufficient to mitigate broader security concerns. Overall, the site is vulnerable and lacks fundamental security best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Validate and correct domain registration to ensure legitimacy and compliance with registry rules.
  2. Remove or audit third-party iframe content to eliminate potential malicious redirects.
  3. Implement HTTPS with strong SSL/TLS configuration and deploy standard security headers.
  4. Publish clear privacy policy, terms of service, and contact information to improve trust and compliance.
  5. Conduct a full security audit to identify and remediate vulnerabilities and improve incident response readiness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Generic detected. Website content is blocked or replaced by an iframe redirecting to an external domain (findresultsquick.com), indicating possible WAF or content blocking mechanism. These observations may be incomplete. For a fuller analysis, contact guard@offseq.com.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, ConsentManager CMP
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
ConsentManager
Tracking pixels
ConsentManager tracking pixel
Marketing tools
ConsentManager CMP
Transparency
poor

Site quality

Design
poor
User experience
poor
Content relevance
poor
Navigation
poor
Professionalism
poor
Trustworthiness
low

Key observations

  1. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain invalidity
  2. Website content is minimal and replaced by an iframe to an unrelated external domain
  3. No privacy policy or terms of service found
  4. Cookie consent mechanism present via ConsentManager
  5. No contact information or business details visible
  6. Potential security risk due to iframe redirection to suspicious domain
  7. No visible security headers or SSL configuration data
  8. Website likely blocked or under WAF/security challenge
  9. No business or branding information found
  10. Content safety rating safe but content is minimal and suspicious
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses basic JavaScript and a third-party ConsentManager CMP for cookie consent. There is no evidence of a CMS or modern web frameworks. The site appears to be hosted without visible hosting provider information. Performance is moderate but limited by the iframe content. Mobile optimization and accessibility are basic. SEO optimization is poor due to lack of metadata and structured data. The site is likely blocked or under a security challenge, limiting technical analysis.
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 rapidgrid.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 rapidgrid.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.