Skip to main content

Security report for rotterdam.nl

Gemeente Rotterdam · Government · Netherlands

Low risk. 2 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view.

Security score

83/100

Risk levelLow

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

Gemeente Rotterdam operates the official municipal website providing comprehensive information, news, and services to residents, entrepreneurs, visitors, and government stakeholders. The site serves as a central hub for accessing public services such as parking registration, waste management, passport applications, and local government contact. It holds a strong market position as the authoritative source for municipal information in Rotterdam, Netherlands. Technically, the website leverages modern web technologies including React and Next.js frameworks, ensuring good mobile optimization, accessibility, and SEO practices. Integration of third-party tools like ReadSpeaker enhances accessibility, while Kameleoon supports marketing and user experience optimization. The site demonstrates moderate to good performance and a consistent, professional design. From a security perspective, the site enforces HTTPS with strong SSL configuration and employs security headers. However, explicit security policies, incident response contacts, and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not publicly available, representing areas for improvement. Privacy compliance is well addressed with clear cookie and privacy policies and GDPR adherence. Overall, the website is trustworthy, professional, and secure with minor gaps in published security governance documentation. Strategic recommendations include publishing security policies, establishing incident response contacts, and enhancing security headers to further strengthen the security posture.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
55/ 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

2 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

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • 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 rotterdam.nl

This scan found 12 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
100
Security headers
80
Email security
70
DNS health
90
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
55
Average
83

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

Gemeente Rotterdam is positioned as a key public sector entity delivering essential municipal services digitally. Its business model focuses on providing transparent, accessible government services and information to a broad audience including residents, businesses, and visitors. The website supports multiple service areas such as parking, waste management, and civil documentation, indicating diversified service offerings. The presence of official branding and social media channels enhances its outreach and engagement. Growth indicators include continuous news updates and digital service expansions. Partnerships with related municipal domains and service providers support an integrated ecosystem. The site’s operations reflect a mature digital presence consistent with a large government organization.

Security posture

The website exhibits a mature security posture with enforced HTTPS, use of security headers, and no visible exposure of sensitive data. The integration of accessibility and marketing scripts is managed without apparent vulnerabilities. However, the absence of published security policies, incident response procedures, and vulnerability disclosure channels limits transparency and readiness perception. GDPR compliance is evident through privacy and cookie policies. The site would benefit from formalizing security governance documentation and providing direct security contact information to improve incident handling and trust. No critical vulnerabilities or suspicious activities were detected in the content or technical configuration.

Recommendations

  1. Publish a dedicated security policy page outlining security practices and governance.
  2. Establish and publicize an incident response contact channel (e.g., security@rotterdam.nl).
  3. Implement and expose a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file.
  4. Enhance HTTP security headers with additional directives such as Referrer-Policy and Feature-Policy.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and dependencies for security vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Gemeente Rotterdam
Description
Officiële website van de gemeente Rotterdam. Hier vindt u alle informatie, nieuwsberichten en dienstverlening van gemeente Rotterdam.
Key services
Information dissemination, Citizen services, News updates, Parking registration, Waste management, Passport applications, Local government contact
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
React, Next.js, ReadSpeaker, Kameleoon
Frameworks
Next.js
Performance
moderate
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Secure cookie consent mechanism
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security headers

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

Ad networks
Kameleoon
Marketing tools
Kameleoon
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is official municipal government site for Rotterdam
  2. Content is comprehensive and well-structured
  3. Good use of modern web technologies and accessibility features
  4. No signs of malicious or suspicious content
  5. Privacy and cookie policies are present and GDPR compliant
  6. No explicit security or incident response policies published
  7. No direct contact emails or phone numbers publicly listed, only contact form
  8. External links mostly to official or related municipal domains
  9. Use of third-party scripts for accessibility (ReadSpeaker) and marketing (Kameleoon)
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a modern React and Next.js framework stack, enabling server-side rendering and optimized performance. It uses ReadSpeaker for accessibility and Kameleoon for marketing optimization. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility features such as skip-to-content links and ARIA attributes. SEO is supported by comprehensive meta tags including Open Graph and Twitter cards. The site does not reveal its hosting provider explicitly. Performance is moderate with deferred script loading and CSS preloading. No CMS is explicitly identified, suggesting a custom or proprietary solution. Technical risks are minimal but monitoring third-party scripts is advised to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
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 rotterdam.nl. 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 rotterdam.nl.

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.