Skip to main content

Security report for roughleehome.org.uk

Rough Lee Care Home · Healthcare · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

51/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Rough Lee Care Home is a small, established non-profit residential care provider for adults with physical disabilities, operated by The Alex Group Charity in Accrington, UK. The website presents a professional and well-structured digital presence built on WordPress with modern plugins and SEO optimizations. The home has a strong reputation supported by consistent 5-star RDB ratings and CQC registration. However, the domain WHOIS data is unavailable due to a naming rules violation, which raises some concerns about domain registration legitimacy. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and secure forms, but lacks explicit security headers and incident response policies. Privacy and cookie policies are not found, indicating compliance gaps. Overall, the website is trustworthy and informative but would benefit from enhanced privacy compliance and security transparency.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
73/ 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. 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 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. 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

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

Keep watching roughleehome.org.uk

This scan found 26 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
57
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
20
GDPR outside view
73
Average
51

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 business operates in the healthcare and non-profit sectors, targeting adults with disabilities and their families seeking residential care. It has a long history (41 years) and a stable market position supported by charity funding and local council payments. The website highlights key services such as 24-hour residential care and accommodation in a peaceful environment. The organization maintains trust through certifications and testimonials but lacks visible digital privacy and security policies. The marketing ecosystem includes push notifications via WonderPush but no major advertising or analytics platforms. The business model is focused on care provision rather than commercial sales.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and uses secure contact forms, which are positive security practices. However, it lacks visible security headers like CSP, HSTS, and X-Frame-Options, which are recommended to mitigate common web attacks. There is no published security incident response or vulnerability disclosure policy, which limits transparency and preparedness. The absence of WHOIS data and domain registration irregularities reduce trust. No known vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. Overall, the security maturity is moderate but could be improved with better headers, policies, and regular plugin audits.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with user consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, and X-Frame-Options to enhance web security.
  3. Publish a security incident response plan and vulnerability disclosure policy to increase transparency and readiness.
  4. Investigate and resolve domain WHOIS registration issues to improve domain legitimacy and trust.
  5. Enhance accessibility features and conduct regular security audits of third-party plugins and themes.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Rough Lee Care Home
Description
Rough Lee Home is run by The Alex Group Charity, providing residential care for adults with physical disabilities in Accrington. The home is set in beautiful grounds with abundant wildlife and peaceful surroundings. It offers 24-hour support and accepts direct payments, council funding, and self-funding. The home has been open for 41 years and is registered for 17 beds with the Care Quality Commission.
Key services
Residential care for adults with physical disabilities, Accommodation in a supportive environment, Community and recreational activities
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 7.0.2, Elementor 3.34.1, All in One SEO 4.9.3, Slider Revolution 6.7.25, jQuery 3.7.1, FontAwesome 6.7.2
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of secure contact forms

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Tracking pixels
WonderPush
Marketing tools
WonderPush
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and images.
  2. No privacy or cookie policies explicitly found on homepage or linked pages.
  3. Contact information is clearly presented with emails, phone numbers, and physical address.
  4. No social media links detected in the provided HTML.
  5. Use of modern WordPress plugins and themes with SEO optimizations.
  6. No explicit security headers detected in HTML source.
  7. No visible forms in the provided HTML snippet; contact forms likely on contact page.
  8. No evidence of security incident response or vulnerability disclosure policies.
  9. WHOIS data is missing or blocked due to domain naming rules violation.
  10. No advertising networks detected except WonderPush for push notifications.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 7.0.2 using Elementor and Slider Revolution plugins, indicating a modern and flexible CMS infrastructure. It uses jQuery and FontAwesome for UI elements and icons. SEO is supported by All in One SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Performance is moderate with some external font and script dependencies. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design elements. Accessibility is basic but could be improved. No major technical debt or deprecated technologies detected. Hosting provider details are not available from the HTML content.
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 roughleehome.org.uk. 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 roughleehome.org.uk.

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.