Skip to main content

Security report for rfm-group.com

RFM Group · Real Estate · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in SSL/TLS, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

RFM Group is a UK-based company specializing in premier property transformation and management services across residential and commercial sectors. With over 60 years of claimed experience, they offer a comprehensive suite of services including insurance reinstatement, design and creation, fit-outs, fixtures and furniture, luxury residential projects, integrated facilities management, and consultancy. Their client portfolio includes major insurers, government bodies, and commercial enterprises, positioning them as a significant player in the UK property management market. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with modern technologies such as jQuery, Swiper.js, and Gravity Forms, and is optimized for SEO and mobile responsiveness. Security posture is generally good with HTTPS and no exposed sensitive data, but lacks explicit security policies and incident response information. The absence of WHOIS registration data raises concerns about domain legitimacy, which impacts overall trust despite the professional web presence.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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

6 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 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
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-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. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  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"

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

Keep watching rfm-group.com

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
27
Security headers
15
Email security
85
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
63

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 company targets public and private clients in the UK property sector, focusing on delivering end-to-end property lifecycle services. Their business model integrates design, build, and maintenance, supported by in-house teams and a broad sector reach including insurance, commercial, residential, government, education, industrial, and healthcare. The parent company is Spatial Property Group, indicating a larger corporate structure. The website demonstrates strong branding consistency, trust signals through client logos and accreditations, and a well-maintained digital presence. However, the discrepancy in domain registration data suggests a need for verification of business claims and domain ownership.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS and uses reputable plugins and technologies, indicating a baseline security maturity. However, the lack of security headers, incident response policies, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms suggests gaps in comprehensive security management. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected, but the absence of cookie consent mechanisms and explicit GDPR compliance features could pose compliance risks. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in transparency and policy documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a detailed security policy and incident response plan on the website.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to enhance GDPR compliance and user privacy transparency.
  3. Verify and update WHOIS domain registration information to align with business claims and improve trust.
  4. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance protection.
  5. Consider publishing a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
RFM Group
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
RFM Group
Description
Premier property transformation and management of residential and commercial spaces across the UK. Creating spaces that perform and inspire.
Key services
Insurance reinstatement, Design & creation, Fit-out and refurbishments, Fixtures, furniture & equipment, Luxury residential, Integrated facilities management, Consultancy & project management
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
jQuery, Swiper.js, Gravity Forms, Yoast SEO, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Frameworks
WordPress, Genesis Blocks
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
excellent

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security plugins (implied by Gravity Forms and WordPress)

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO, Google Site Kit
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured
  2. Content is comprehensive and relevant to property transformation and management
  3. Strong client portfolio and sector coverage
  4. No visible security policy or incident response information
  5. WHOIS data missing or domain not found, raising legitimacy questions
  6. No cookie consent mechanism despite GDPR compliance claims
  7. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern WordPress platform using a combination of jQuery, Swiper.js for sliders, and Gravity Forms for data collection. SEO is enhanced by Yoast SEO plugin and Google Site Kit integration. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts and optimized images. Mobile optimization and accessibility are well addressed. However, no explicit hosting provider information was found. The technical stack is robust for a corporate website but could benefit from enhanced security configurations and performance monitoring.
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 rfm-group.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 rfm-group.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.