Skip to main content

Security report for semplice.com

Semplice · Technology · N/a

Medium risk. 7 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 2 other checks.

Security score

59/100

Risk levelMedium

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

Semplice operates as a customizable portfolio builder platform aimed primarily at designers and creatives, enabling them to build responsive case studies and custom branded project pages. The website is built on WordPress and leverages popular SEO and analytics tools such as Yoast SEO, Google Analytics, and Facebook Pixel, indicating a moderate level of digital maturity. The technical infrastructure is modern and supports mobile optimization and SEO best practices. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, but lacks advanced security headers and explicit privacy or cookie policies, which could be improved to enhance compliance and user trust. The absence of WHOIS data raises some concerns about domain legitimacy, though the website content and design quality suggest a professional operation. Overall, the site presents a moderate risk profile with recommendations to improve privacy compliance and security hardening.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 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

7 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

    • 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

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

Keep watching semplice.com

This scan found 28 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
62
Security headers
15
Email security
70
DNS health
55
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
59

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 targets a niche market of designers and creatives seeking portfolio building solutions, positioning itself as a specialized tool rather than a broad market player. The business model appears to be software-as-a-service or product licensing for portfolio creation. The use of WordPress and common marketing tools suggests a lean operational model focused on digital channels. No explicit information about company size, founding year, or parent company was found, limiting deeper business intelligence. The lack of contact information and privacy policies may impact customer trust and regulatory compliance. The company could benefit from clearer business disclosures and enhanced transparency to strengthen market position and customer confidence.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, which is a fundamental security requirement. However, the absence of security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and others reduces the overall security posture. No forms or input fields were detected, minimizing attack surface from injection or data leakage vulnerabilities. The use of third-party analytics and marketing scripts introduces moderate tracking and privacy considerations. The lack of explicit privacy and cookie policies indicates potential compliance gaps with GDPR and other data protection regulations. Incident response and vulnerability disclosure mechanisms are not evident, which could delay mitigation in case of security incidents. Overall, security maturity is moderate but could be significantly improved with better headers, policies, and transparency.

Recommendations

  1. Implement comprehensive privacy and cookie policies with clear GDPR compliance statements and consent mechanisms.
  2. Add security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Content-Type-Options, and X-Frame-Options to enhance protection against common web attacks.
  3. Publish contact information including support and security incident response contacts to improve trust and readiness.
  4. Consider adding a vulnerability disclosure policy and security.txt file to facilitate responsible reporting of security issues.
  5. Regularly audit and update third-party scripts to minimize privacy risks and potential vulnerabilities.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Semplice
Description
A customizable portfolio builder for designers and creatives.
Key services
customizable portfolio builder, responsive case studies, custom branded project pages
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress 6.8.1, Yoast SEO plugin v24.9, jQuery 3.7.1, Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
75/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enabled

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel
Transparency
basic

Site quality

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

Key observations

  1. Website is a WordPress-based portfolio builder site targeting designers and creatives.
  2. No WHOIS data available, which is unusual and may indicate privacy protection or domain registration issues.
  3. No explicit privacy, cookie, or terms of service pages found in the provided content.
  4. No contact emails or phone numbers explicitly found in the content.
  5. Uses common analytics and marketing scripts including Google Analytics and Facebook Pixel.
  6. No security headers detected in the provided data; HTTPS is enabled.
  7. No forms detected in the provided HTML snippet.
  8. Content is professional and relevant to the business purpose.
  9. No adult or questionable content detected.
  10. No WAF or blocking mechanisms detected; content fully accessible.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress 6.8.1 with the Yoast SEO plugin, indicating a standard CMS-based infrastructure. It uses jQuery 3.7.1 and includes Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager, and Facebook Pixel for analytics and marketing. Fonts are loaded from Google Fonts and a custom font service. The site appears to be well-structured with responsive design and good SEO metadata including Open Graph and JSON-LD structured data. Performance is moderate with asynchronous loading of analytics scripts. No hosting provider information was detected. The absence of security headers and privacy policies suggests some technical debt in security and compliance areas. Overall, the technical implementation is solid but could benefit from enhanced security and privacy features.
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 semplice.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 semplice.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.