Skip to main content

Security report for raptorsmartadvisor.com

Raptor Services A/S · Technology · N/a

Partial score · DNS & email only

65/100

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

Raptor Services A/S operates as a provider of personalization solutions and a Customer Data Platform (CDP), targeting businesses seeking to enhance customer experiences through data-driven personalization. The company positions itself as a premium provider in the personalization technology market, with a business model focused on B2B SaaS offerings. The website content is professionally presented, reflecting a medium-sized technology company founded around 2022. Technically, the website is built on WordPress using the Divi theme, incorporating modern web technologies such as Google Tag Manager and Cookiebot for analytics and cookie consent management. The site demonstrates good mobile optimization and SEO practices, though some accessibility features could be improved. Performance is moderate, with no critical technical issues detected. From a security perspective, the site employs HTTPS and basic security best practices, including cookie consent. However, some security headers like Content-Security-Policy and Referrer-Policy are missing, which could enhance protection. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were identified in the analyzed content. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, warranting further investigation. Overall, the website presents a moderate risk profile with room for improvement in privacy compliance and domain registration transparency. Strategic recommendations include enhancing security headers, publishing comprehensive privacy and terms policies, and verifying domain registration details to strengthen trust and compliance.

Scanned

4 of 7 checks could not complete. The site may be unreachable or blocking automated scans, so the results below cover only what could be checked. Try a rescan later.

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
3of 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

2 findings rated critical or high in the checks that completed. 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 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 raptorsmartadvisor.com

Only DNS and email could be checked this time. Monitoring re-checks every day and emails you when something material changes.

Daily monitoring

€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.

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

Security headers
35
GDPR outside view
95
Average
65

Not counted

  • SSL/TLS: did not complete in this scan.
  • Email security: did not complete in this scan.
  • DNS health: did not complete in this scan.
  • Network security: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 analysis did not complete for this scan. A rescan usually fills it in.

Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using the Divi theme, a popular and flexible framework for website design. It integrates Google Tag Manager for analytics and Cookiebot for cookie consent management, reflecting a modern approach to marketing and privacy compliance. The site uses Google Fonts and standard JavaScript libraries such as jQuery. Performance is moderate with no critical errors detected in the HTML or CSS. Mobile optimization is good, ensuring accessibility across devices. However, accessibility features are basic and could be enhanced to meet higher standards. The technical stack is standard for a mid-sized technology company, with opportunities for modernization through improved security headers and enhanced accessibility 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 raptorsmartadvisor.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 raptorsmartadvisor.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.