Skip to main content

Security report for rlc-group.com

RLC Group · Transportation · United Kingdom

High risk. 6 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 3 other checks.

Security score

46/100

Risk levelHigh

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

RLC Group is a well-established aerospace engineering and manufacturing company with a history dating back to 1955. The company operates globally with facilities in the United Kingdom, Isle of Man, Singapore, and Northern Ireland, offering a broad range of aerospace products including engine components, actuation assemblies, airframes, and ejection seats. Their business model is focused on delivering complete engineering solutions to the aerospace industry, emphasizing technology optimization and customer-driven innovation. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence targeting aerospace industry stakeholders worldwide. Technically, the website uses standard web technologies such as HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript, with a moderate performance profile and good mobile optimization. SEO practices are adequately implemented with proper meta tags and structured navigation. However, no advanced frameworks or CMS platforms were detected, and accessibility features are basic. The site includes cookie consent mechanisms and uses Google Analytics and Plausible for user tracking, indicating moderate digital maturity. From a security perspective, the site lacks explicit security headers and dedicated security or incident response policies, which lowers its security posture score. The presence of BPSS screening for employment roles suggests internal security awareness. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected. Privacy compliance is supported by clear privacy and cookie policies with consent options, though GDPR-specific details are minimal. Overall, the website is trustworthy and professional, with a strong business credibility score. Recommendations include enhancing security headers, adding terms of service and vulnerability disclosure policies, improving accessibility, and providing direct company contact information to strengthen user trust and compliance.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 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

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

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

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • 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

  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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  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 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';…

  4. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No DMARC record found

      DMARC provides email authentication and reporting

      What to do: Add DMARC record: "v=DMARC1; p=none; rua=mailto:dmarc@yourdomain.com"

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

Keep watching rlc-group.com

This scan found 15 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
0
Security headers
65
Email security
80
DNS health
70
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
43
Average
46

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

RLC Group holds a strong market position as a large, privately owned aerospace engineering firm with a global footprint. Their competitive advantage lies in their long-standing industry experience since 1955, diversified product portfolio, and multiple operational sites. Revenue streams likely derive from aerospace component manufacturing and lifecycle services. The target customers include aerospace manufacturers and defense sectors globally. Growth indicators include ongoing investment in technology and facilities, and active recruitment campaigns. The company ecosystem includes several subsidiaries named after geographic locations, supporting specialized operations. Strategic observations highlight a focus on quality, compliance, and customer commitment, with an emphasis on integrity and engineering ambition.

Security posture

The current security maturity level is moderate. The website implements basic privacy and cookie consent mechanisms but lacks visible security headers such as Content Security Policy, HSTS, or X-Frame-Options. No incident response or security policy pages are present, and no dedicated security contact channels were found. Employment roles mention BPSS screening and export control restrictions, indicating some internal security controls. There are no signs of exposed credentials or vulnerabilities in the HTML content. Compliance with GDPR is implied but not explicitly detailed. The absence of terms of service and vulnerability disclosure policies represents a compliance gap. Overall, the security culture appears cautious but could benefit from formalized policies and enhanced technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers (CSP, HSTS, X-Frame-Options) to improve site security.
  2. Publish explicit terms of service and vulnerability disclosure policies to enhance compliance and transparency.
  3. Add direct company contact emails and phone numbers on the website to improve user trust and communication.
  4. Enhance accessibility features to meet higher standards and improve user experience for all visitors.
  5. Regularly review and update SSL/TLS configurations to maintain strong encryption and trust.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
RLC Group
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
RLC Group
Description
Leading the way in the development and delivery of solutions to the challenges faced by the Aerospace industry.
Key services
Engine components, Actuation assemblies, Airframes, Ejection seats, Product lifecycle solutions
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
60/100
Good practices seen
  • Cookie consent banner with opt-in/out and settings
  • BPSS screening mentioned for employment roles

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Plausible
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Transparency
poor

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed with clear aerospace industry focus.
  2. Content is comprehensive about company history, products, and career opportunities.
  3. Cookie consent mechanism is implemented with opt-in/out and settings.
  4. No explicit terms of service or security policy pages found.
  5. No exposed sensitive data or obvious vulnerabilities detected.
  6. Social media presence limited to Twitter link.
  7. No direct company contact emails or phone numbers visible in HTML content.
  8. Employment roles mention BPSS screening and export control restrictions indicating security awareness.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using standard web technologies without reliance on heavy frameworks or CMS platforms, which simplifies maintenance but may limit advanced features. Performance is moderate, with room for optimization. The site is mobile responsive and SEO optimized with proper meta tags and structured navigation. The cookie consent mechanism is well implemented with opt-in/out and settings options. However, the lack of detected security headers and absence of advanced accessibility features indicate areas for technical improvement. No hosting provider or CDN information was detected, which could be explored for performance and security enhancements.
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 rlc-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 rlc-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.