Skip to main content

Security report for rppanels.co.uk

R P Panels Ltd · Manufacturing · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and SSL/TLS.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

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

R P Panels Ltd is a well-established family owned business specializing in the supply of timber and wood-based sheet materials to both trade and retail customers. With over 45 years of experience, the company offers a broad product range including panels, laminates, door blanks, and related manufacturing services such as cutting, edging, and bespoke veneering. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand presence targeting construction and manufacturing sectors primarily in the UK. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with common plugins like Yoast SEO and jQuery-based sliders, delivering a moderate performance and good mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS and cookie consent mechanisms in place, though improvements are recommended in security headers and API key management. Overall, the site is trustworthy and compliant with GDPR, providing clear contact information and privacy policies. Minor technical issues such as a broken Google Maps integration slightly impact user experience but do not detract from the site's credibility.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
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

4 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"

  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.

    • 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

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

Keep watching rppanels.co.uk

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
30
Email security
85
DNS health
50
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
65

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 operates in the manufacturing and retail sectors, focusing on timber and wood products. Its business model combines B2B and B2C sales with value-added services like bespoke manufacturing and express delivery. The market position is that of a specialist supplier with a long-standing reputation. The website supports growth through clear product showcases and service descriptions, supported by social media engagement on Facebook and Instagram. The absence of terms of service and explicit security policies suggests areas for maturity improvement. The partnership with Aubergine262 for web development indicates professional digital support. Revenue streams likely include product sales and manufacturing services. The company targets trade professionals and retail customers requiring quality timber products and related services.

Security posture

The website enforces HTTPS and implements a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR. No critical vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. However, the Google Maps API key is exposed and the map fails to load due to an API error, which could affect user experience and potentially expose the key to misuse if not properly restricted. No explicit security headers were detected, which is a security best practice gap. The newsletter form uses a nonce for CSRF protection, indicating some security awareness. There is no visible security policy or incident response contact information, which could be improved to enhance trust and readiness. Overall, the security posture is moderate with room for improvement in headers, API key management, and incident response transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement standard security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-XSS-Protection to enhance site security.
  2. Restrict and secure the Google Maps API key usage and resolve the map loading error to improve user experience and reduce risk.
  3. Add a dedicated security policy page and provide incident response contact channels to improve transparency and readiness.
  4. Ensure all third-party scripts and plugins are regularly updated to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider adding terms of service and enhancing accessibility features to improve compliance and user inclusivity.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
R P Panels Ltd
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
R P Panels Ltd
Description
R P Panels Ltd is a family owned and run business established in 1980. We supply timber and wood based sheet materials to the trade and retail.
Key services
Supply of timber and wood based sheet materials, Cutting and edging, Bespoke veneer panels, Bespoke doors, Bespoke profiled panels, Priming, Laminating, Express delivery
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Yoast SEO plugin, jQuery, Slick Slider, Google Maps API
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Cookie consent mechanism implemented
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of nonce in newsletter form

Analytics and tracking

Tracking level
minimal
Privacy practices
good

Advertising

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 no blocking or WAF challenges.
  2. Content is professionally presented and relevant to the timber and manufacturing industry.
  3. Cookie consent and privacy policy are implemented and GDPR compliant.
  4. No terms of service or explicit security policy pages found.
  5. Google Maps integration is broken due to API loading error.
  6. No visible analytics or tracking scripts detected beyond cookie control.
  7. Contact information is comprehensive and clearly presented.
  8. Use of WordPress and common plugins indicates standard CMS usage.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS using a custom theme with integration of jQuery and Slick Slider for interactive elements. SEO is enhanced via Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD) for rich snippets. The site loads external resources from Google Fonts and Google Maps APIs. Performance is moderate with some client-side scripts for sliders and maps. Mobile optimization is good with responsive design and viewport meta tags. Accessibility is basic with some ARIA roles and semantic HTML but could be improved. The Google Maps integration is broken due to API loading issues. No advanced frameworks detected beyond WordPress and jQuery. Hosting and domain registration are stable and reputable. Overall, the technical infrastructure is standard for a small business website with opportunities for modernization and security hardening.
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 rppanels.co.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 rppanels.co.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.