Skip to main content

Security report for sacredmiles.com

Sacred Miles · Other · N/a

Medium risk. 9 critical or high findings in Email security, Security headers and 2 other checks.

Security score

61/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Sacred Miles is a niche travel service provider specializing in spiritual and educational tours in the Baltic States and Russia. The website presents basic information about travel opportunities focused on religious and cultural experiences, targeting travelers interested in Christian and spiritual tours. The business appears to be small and established since 2009, with a consistent domain registration history. Technically, the website uses standard web technologies including Google Analytics, Google Adsense for advertising, and Woopra for user tracking. The site is hosted with DNS services via Cloudflare and uses HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communication. However, the site lacks modern security headers and advanced SEO or accessibility features, indicating room for technical improvement. From a security perspective, the site has a moderate posture with HTTPS enabled but no visible security headers or privacy policies. There are no forms or data collection points, reducing attack surface, but also limiting user engagement. The absence of privacy and cookie policies and contact information reduces compliance with GDPR and general trustworthiness. Overall, the website is functional but basic, with moderate risk due to missing privacy and security best practices. Strategic improvements in privacy compliance, security headers, and contact transparency would enhance trust and reduce risk.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
35/ 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

9 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      No email authentication configured

      Domain is vulnerable to email spoofing

      What to do: Implement SPF, DKIM, and DMARC immediately

  2. 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';…

  3. GDPR outside view

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

    • 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 sacredmiles.com

This scan found 24 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. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

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
65
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
75
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
35
Average
61

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

Sacred Miles operates in a niche segment of the travel industry focusing on spiritual and educational tours in the Baltic and Russian regions. The business model centers on providing specialized travel packages and study tours, targeting a specific audience interested in religious and cultural heritage. The company has maintained a consistent online presence since 2009, indicating stability. The use of subdomains for tour guides suggests an attempt to expand service offerings. However, the lack of visible contact details and formal policies may limit customer trust and growth potential. Advertising through Google Adsense indicates a revenue stream from site traffic, but no direct e-commerce or booking functionality is evident. Partnerships or subsidiaries beyond the subdomain are not identified.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a basic security posture with HTTPS enabled, ensuring encrypted data transmission. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options is a notable gap that could expose the site to common web attacks like clickjacking or MIME sniffing. No forms or input fields reduce the risk of injection attacks but also limit user interaction. The lack of privacy and cookie policies indicates non-compliance with GDPR and other data protection regulations. No incident response contacts or security policies are published, which could delay response to security events. Overall, the security maturity is low to moderate, with clear opportunities for improvement.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with explicit user consent mechanisms to improve GDPR compliance.
  2. Add standard security headers (Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options) to enhance protection against common web vulnerabilities.
  3. Publish clear contact information including security incident response contacts to improve transparency and incident handling.
  4. Enhance mobile optimization and accessibility to improve user experience and SEO performance.
  5. Conduct regular security audits and vulnerability scans to identify and remediate potential risks proactively.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Sacred Miles
Description
Travel opportunities in the Baltic Region and Russia
Key services
Spiritual travel tours, Educational study tours, Christian travel and church visits, Baltic and Russia travel packages
Content quality
basic
Branding
moderate

Technology

Stack
Google Analytics, Google Adsense, Woopra Analytics, Cloudflare DNS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
basic
Accessibility
basic
SEO
basic

Security

Observed score
55/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled
  • Use of Cloudflare DNS

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Woopra
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Adsense
Tracking pixels
Woopra
Marketing tools
Woopra
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
basic
User experience
basic
Content relevance
basic
Navigation
basic
Professionalism
basic
Trustworthiness
moderate

Key observations

  1. Website lacks privacy, cookie, and terms of service policies
  2. No contact emails or phone numbers found on the site
  3. No social media links detected
  4. Site uses Google Adsense and tracking scripts for analytics
  5. No visible forms or data collection inputs
  6. Basic SEO metadata present but no advanced structured data
  7. Site content is minimal and focused on spiritual travel in Baltic and Russia regions
  8. No security headers detected in provided data
  9. HTTPS is enabled and active
  10. Domain WHOIS data is public and consistent with business claims
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a simple technology stack including Google Analytics and Woopra for analytics, Google Adsense for advertising, and Cloudflare for DNS services. The HTML content is valid and includes basic SEO meta tags but lacks advanced structured data like JSON-LD or Open Graph tags. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of scripts. Mobile optimization is basic, with no explicit responsive design detected. Accessibility features are minimal. The site does not use a known CMS, suggesting a custom or static site. Hosting appears stable but could benefit from modern frameworks and enhanced technical SEO. No forms or interactive elements reduce complexity but also limit engagement.
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 sacredmiles.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 sacredmiles.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.