Skip to main content

Security report for safewareinc.com

Safeware · Government · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

63/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Safeware is a specialized provider of safety and security solutions primarily targeting first responders, schools, and government agencies. The company positions itself as a leader in its niche, offering contract pricing to its clients. The website reflects a professional and focused business model, catering to institutional clients with a clear emphasis on safety and security products and services. The digital presence is built on a modern WordPress platform using Elementor and NitroPack, ensuring good performance and mobile optimization. Analytics are managed via Google Tag Manager, indicating a moderate level of user tracking. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, though there is room for improvement in security headers and incident response transparency. The absence of WHOIS data and privacy-related policies suggests areas for compliance enhancement. Overall, the website is professional and trustworthy but would benefit from improved transparency and security best practices.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 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 Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  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 safewareinc.com

This scan found 27 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
52
Security headers
15
Email security
65
DNS health
80
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
63

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

Safeware operates in the government and public safety sector, focusing on providing safety and security solutions to first responders and educational institutions. Its business model revolves around contract pricing, indicating a B2B approach with likely long-term client relationships. The company leverages digital marketing tools such as Google Tag Manager for analytics and tracking. The lack of visible contact information and privacy policies may limit customer trust and regulatory compliance. The website's consistent branding and clear messaging support its market positioning as a leader in safety solutions. There is no evidence of parent or subsidiary companies, suggesting an independent medium-sized enterprise. Strategic partnerships or payment processors were not identified in the provided data.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS with a presumably strong SSL configuration, enhancing data confidentiality and integrity. However, the absence of key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces protection against common web attacks. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is provided, which could hinder timely reporting and mitigation of security issues. The use of Google Tag Manager introduces moderate user tracking, but privacy compliance indicators are weak due to missing privacy and cookie policies. No exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries were detected in the analysis. Overall, the security posture is moderate but requires enhancements in policy transparency, security headers, and incident response readiness to align with best practices.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and cookie policy with clear consent mechanisms to improve privacy compliance.
  2. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to strengthen web security.
  3. Create and maintain a security.txt file or equivalent vulnerability disclosure policy to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  4. Provide clear contact information including emails and phone numbers for general inquiries and security incidents to enhance trust and responsiveness.
  5. Regularly monitor domain registration details and consider removing privacy protection if appropriate to increase transparency and legitimacy.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Safeware
Description
Safeware is a leader in safety and security solutions for first responders, schools, and government agencies. Request a quote for contract pricing today.
Key services
safety solutions, security solutions, contract pricing
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
Google Tag Manager, NitroPack, Elementor, WordPress
Frameworks
Elementor
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
poor

Advertising

Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible and not blocked by WAF or security challenges.
  2. No WHOIS data available, indicating possible privacy protection or recent domain registration.
  3. Website uses modern technologies including WordPress, Elementor, and NitroPack for performance.
  4. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service policies found in the provided HTML content.
  5. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the provided content.
  6. No security.txt or vulnerability disclosure information detected.
  7. Website content is professional and targeted to government and first responder sectors.
  8. SSL is enabled and appears properly configured.
  9. Google Tag Manager is used for analytics and tracking.
  10. No suspicious or malicious content detected.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress with Elementor page builder and NitroPack for performance optimization, indicating a modern and maintainable infrastructure. Google Tag Manager is integrated for analytics and marketing purposes. The site loads fonts from Google Fonts and uses standard web technologies including HTML5 and CSS3. Performance is rated as fast, with good mobile optimization and basic accessibility features. However, the absence of some security headers and privacy-related pages suggests technical debt in compliance and security areas. Hosting provider details were not identified, which could be further investigated for infrastructure resilience and security. Overall, the technical implementation supports a professional web presence but requires improvements in security and privacy controls.
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 safewareinc.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 safewareinc.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.