Skip to main content

Security report for schaettle.at

Versicherungsbüro Schättle GmbH · Finance · Austria

Partial score · DNS & email only

39/100

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

Versicherungsbüro Schättle GmbH is an independent insurance brokerage firm based in Vienna, Austria, operating three physical offices and offering a range of insurance advisory and brokerage services. The company emphasizes personal consultation, competitive pricing, and strong partnerships with major insurance providers. Their website is professionally designed with good content quality and clear navigation, targeting private individuals and families in Vienna seeking insurance solutions. Technically, the website is built on WordPress with Elementor and several plugins, hosted on a LiteSpeed server with DNS managed by Dynamix. However, a critical security issue is the absence of a valid SSL certificate, resulting in no HTTPS support, which significantly impacts the site's security posture. Privacy compliance is partial, with a privacy policy present but no cookie consent mechanism detected. Contact information is comprehensive and easily accessible. Overall, the site demonstrates good business credibility but requires urgent security improvements.

Scanned

3 of 7 checks could not complete. The site may be unreachable or blocking automated scans, so the results below cover only what could be checked. Try a rescan later.

NIS2 and GDPR posture

NIS2 outside view
Not assessed
GDPR outside view
Not assessed

Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.

Priority findings

2 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. 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.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  2. Network security

    Services reachable from the internet are the first thing attackers probe. Anything open that does not need to be should be closed.

    • High

      High-Risk Service Exposed: FTP

      Port 21 (FTP) is publicly accessible - FTP - Often unencrypted file transfer

      What to do: Consider restricting access to FTP or implementing strong authentication

      • NIS2 21(2)(e)
      • IR 2024/2690 6.7.2(f): Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690, Annex point 6.7.2(f): Network security
      • NIST CM-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 CM-7: Least Functionality
      • NIST SC-7: NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 SC-7: Boundary Protection

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

Keep watching schaettle.at

This scan found 6 issues across 4 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
0
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
20
Average
39

Not counted

  • Security headers: did not complete in this scan.
  • GDPR outside view: did not complete in this scan.
  • 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 positions itself as a trusted, independent insurance broker with a focus on personal service and competitive pricing in the Vienna market. Their business model relies on direct client engagement through physical offices and online services such as claims reporting and insurance switching. The presence of multiple well-known insurance partners strengthens their market credibility. The website content and testimonials indicate a customer-centric approach. The firm appears to be a small-sized enterprise with no parent or subsidiary companies identified. Their marketing leverages SEO and social media channels like Facebook and Instagram. The technical infrastructure is modern but lacks critical security features, which could affect customer trust and regulatory compliance.

Security posture

The website's security posture is weak due to the lack of a valid SSL certificate and absence of HTTPS, exposing users to potential data interception risks. No advanced security headers or mechanisms like HSTS, OCSP stapling, or session resumption are implemented. The site is free from known SSL vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed or POODLE but remains vulnerable due to missing encryption. No published security policies or incident response contacts are found, indicating limited transparency in security governance. The site uses standard WordPress plugins and server software but should prioritize securing communications and enhancing security headers to protect user data and comply with GDPR requirements.

Recommendations

  1. Install and maintain a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement a cookie consent mechanism to comply with GDPR and enhance privacy transparency.
  3. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Publish clear security and incident response policies, including dedicated contact channels for security issues.
  5. Regularly audit and update all plugins, themes, and server software to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Versicherungsbüro Schättle GmbH
Technical notes

Notes

The website uses a modern WordPress CMS with Elementor page builder and several Jet plugins for enhanced functionality. Hosting is on a LiteSpeed server with DNS managed by Dynamix. The site includes structured data (JSON-LD) for SEO and social media integration with Open Graph and Twitter cards. Performance metrics indicate no load time data, suggesting potential monitoring gaps. Mobile optimization is good, and SEO practices are well implemented with meta tags and schema. However, the lack of HTTPS and security headers is a significant technical debt. The site uses custom analytics and tracking scripts, which should be reviewed for privacy compliance. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires security hardening and performance monitoring improvements.
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 schaettle.at. 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 schaettle.at.

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.