Skip to main content

Security report for relai.com

Other · N/a

Medium risk. 8 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

64/100

Risk levelMedium

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

The website at relai.com/lander is currently a minimal parking or placeholder page with very limited content. It primarily serves as a landing page with embedded Google Adsense scripts and a parking lander system. There is no visible business information, contact details, or policies presented on the page, which limits the ability to assess the company's market position or services. The domain is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC since 2003, indicating a long-standing registration, but the website content does not reflect an active or mature business presence. From a technical perspective, the site uses basic JavaScript and a parking lander framework (PW). The hosting provider is GoDaddy, and external resources are loaded from Google and wsimg.com domains. The website lacks SEO optimization, accessibility features, and security headers, and there is no evidence of HTTPS enforcement or SSL configuration details in the provided data. Mobile optimization is basic, and overall performance is moderate. Security posture is weak due to the absence of security headers, privacy policies, and contact information for incident response. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, but the lack of security best practices and policies reduces trustworthiness. The domain registration is consistent and not privacy protected, which is positive, but the minimal website content and lack of business details lower the legitimacy score. Overall, the website appears to be a parked domain with no active business presence or compliance measures. Strategic recommendations include developing a full website with clear business information, implementing privacy and cookie policies, enhancing security headers and HTTPS enforcement, and providing contact and incident response details to improve trust and compliance.

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

8 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

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

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

Keep watching relai.com

This scan found 23 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
77
Security headers
25
Email security
70
DNS health
60
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
50
Average
64

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 domain relai.com is registered since 2003 but currently hosts a parking lander page with minimal content and no visible business information. There is no indication of the company's industry, services, or market positioning from the website content. The lack of contact details, policies, or branding suggests the domain may be unused or awaiting development. No partnerships or subsidiaries are identified. The business model and revenue streams cannot be determined from the current data. The absence of marketing or analytics tools indicates low digital maturity and limited customer engagement.

Security posture

The website lacks fundamental security measures such as security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, etc.) and does not provide privacy or cookie policies, which are critical for GDPR compliance. No incident response or vulnerability disclosure information is available. The domain uses GoDaddy as registrar without privacy protection, which is transparent but does not compensate for the lack of website security features. No SSL configuration details were provided, and HTTPS enforcement is unknown. Overall, the security posture is weak, with significant gaps in compliance and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Develop and publish comprehensive privacy and cookie policies to comply with GDPR and inform users.
  2. Implement security headers and enforce HTTPS to improve security posture and protect user data.
  3. Add clear contact information and incident response channels to enhance trust and enable security reporting.
  4. Replace the parking lander with a fully developed website containing business information and services.
  5. Enable DNSSEC and other domain security features to protect against DNS spoofing and improve domain trust.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Content quality
poor
Branding
inconsistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript
Frameworks
PW (Parking Lander System)
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
poor

Security

Observed score
30/100

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website content is minimal and appears to be a parking or placeholder page.
  2. No privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found.
  3. No contact information or business details provided on the page.
  4. Uses a parking lander system (PW) with minimal HTML content.
  5. External scripts loaded from Google Adsense and wsimg.com for parking lander functionality.
  6. No security headers or HTTPS enforcement information available from provided data.
  7. Domain is old and registered with GoDaddy without privacy protection.
  8. No signs of adult or unsafe content.
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a parking lander system (PW) with minimal HTML content and JavaScript loaded from external domains such as Google Adsense and wsimg.com. The hosting provider is GoDaddy.com, LLC. There is no evidence of a CMS or advanced frameworks. The site lacks SEO meta tags, accessibility features, and performance optimizations. Mobile optimization is basic. The absence of security headers and HTTPS enforcement indicates technical debt and security risks. The domain is stable and long-registered but the website infrastructure is minimal and not suitable for active business operations.
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 relai.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 relai.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.